I don't think it was "entrapment", and I don't think the original poster was saying that it was. I think that the point of the post could have been better put into a paragraph or three as opposed to a sentence.
The contest could keep records of those who participate, and all the attempts made, and then hand them over to a law enforcement agency to give the agency a "fingerprint" of the hackers involved. Since the contest was legal, the hackers would not have attempted to cover their tracks, and most likely would have used a trackable/real internet account. The law enforcement agency, once posessing the "fingerprint" of the attack could then compare it to similar (illegal) attacks and see if any of them had the same fingerprint.
The actual act of hacking a server that a company has opened up for hacking is not illegal and they could not be arrested for trying to hack that particular server, but they could then be brought under investigation for any crimes that were committed with similar methodology.
Spam, while obnoxious (especially HTML emails) is not the biggest unsolicited waste of money/bandwidth, at least not that I'm experiencing.
Byte for byte, the largest wastes of bandwidth I'm experiencing can be attributed to two categories: 1: Windows SysAdmins who refuse/don't know how to patch their systems against the likes of nimda and code red. They also waste space in/var with their own little morons_log which seems to update every second. 2: Klez. Average number of klez-bearing emails recieved per day across the network-15.(And it's a SMALL network.) Klez contains attachments of variable sizes. Average number of minutes spent per day reassuring panic-stricken family members/co-workers/non-techie friends: 5. Cost of antivirus software per Windows compuer on network: $50. Time spent downloading antivirus updates--too much.
Spam can be blood-boilingly infuriating and push us to the point of wanting to ressurect public hangings, but I think that by and large the two categories I list are the biggest wastes of everything... And I'll be damned if I can find a way to opt out.
Hm. But isn't sending unsolicited commercial advertisements to cellphones, or calling cellphones as a telemarketer illegal, since the reciepient has to pay for the call/spam? I'm not sure, but I thought it was.
Hmm.. I think it will be a battle of perceptions. On one hand we have "United" and "standards", on the other hand everyone knows that it's an effort of SuSE, Caldera, Connectiva, and TurboLinux. None of which I would put on my servers or my network for more than a few days of "play".
If the players included Debian or Slackware then my opinion would immediately fly from "Yeah. Cool. Another distro" to "Hey, great. Can't wait to play with it and see how it goes".
I'm not entirely sure how the industry will recieve United Linux, and until I'm sure I'm not switching any of the boxes under my control over. Somehow, I think the rest of the industry will be playing the same game of 'wait and see'.
You're absolutely right about businesses going for RedHat. Businesses are fickle, though. If United Linux can gain the support of vendors (both hardware and software) and capture the interest of sysadmins then the business world will float that way.
That's only true if the lock is on the door of a large record or software company. The DMCA doesn't protect individual locks.
;)
-Sara
Re:Yeah, he was a script kiddie and not a hacker.
on
Tracking Mafiaboy
·
· Score: 1
I'm not going to get into the cliche argument about "cracker" vs "hacker". Yes, we all start out as "script kiddies"--using the tools that others have created for us. Some of them use 'em to cause harm, others use them to learn and expand.
The distinction between the two might be foggy at first, I think that all of us have done something "just plain destructive" sometime in our life, be it putting whipped cream in a mailbox, gluing a lock, getting someone kicked off of AOL, or trying to break into someone's machine. I think, though, that we've also quickly grown bored of our more juvinile pursuits and moved on to other areas. Repairing our cars, building a computer from throw-away parts, inventing a better text editor, or starting Yet Another Blog (tm).
The line is clear between "mischief" and "maliciousness", and those who pass over it have no excuses. They are criminally responsible and should be treated as such.
That said, yes. It is a shame that those with more knowledge aren't as willing to share. However, I've found that if you're bright and eager and willing to do a bit of preliminary research you'll absolutely find people who are willing to share--even if it's just stepping you through the first setup of a new OS. It's the people who are arrogant little twits that get cast by the wayside... As they should be.
Hm. Is your friend a slashdotter, too by any chance? I've gotten approximately 10 klezzy's in the past 10 days from various user-of-slashdot email addresses (most of which contain slashdot's anti-spam garbungling) I've also apparently had a lot of klez sent out using a spoofed address containing the domain which I primarily use as my email address when I post to/.
Meethinks Klez likes getting email addresses from/. Talk about a stupid virus--most of us don't even use windows.:p
I used to get major shoulder/upper back problems, then I got a desk/chair set that had three things--1: a monitor stand that allowed the monitor to be below the desk surface so that if I were to sit up straight and look directly forward my eyes would go over the top of the monitor. This allows me to tilt the monitor up slightly and view it by looking down. 2: drop-down keyboard tray of adjustable height, positioned so that if I were to sit with my elbows bent at a 90 degree angle I'd be able to type without any additional bending. 3: a hard-backed hard-seated chair with adjustable height and lower back support.
Because I'm narrow-shouldered I don't find it necessary to have an ergonomic keyboard, and in fact would most likely find that it would cause additional stress to my arms/body, as it would introduce an extreme posturing of the wrists.
It all depends on the persons individual needs, but just changing the keyboard isn't going to change everything. Other things need to be taken into consideration as well. Also--everyone's ergonomics are different. If at all possible, people should choose their own working environment, and not be forced to conform to what others have found affective. Of course, if employers were to allow that extensive of an ability to customize... we might see a sudden increase in the sales of laptops and beanbags.
-Sara
Yeah, he was a script kiddie and not a hacker.
on
Tracking Mafiaboy
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Agreed. The article says that the kid had obviously researched his targets rather thoroughly. This takes time, planning, understanding, and an extreme desire for attention.
He was a script kiddie, though. He took the scripts and apps of other people and used them for what he did. He did not seem to have a thorough understanding of the things he was doing, the article says he had to type commands several times before they'd work. I don't know about you, but even things I use casually are embedded in my fingertips, and having to retype a command isn't a very common occurence. Having to retype it 3-4 times is a non-occurence.
If the kid had been a real hacker (using the geek-culture definition of the word...) He would have taken that time and desire for recognition and learned new OSes thoroughly, written a program or ten, or taken up a more positive pursuit. Or at the very least, I believe that he would have been too afraid of doing what he did--because he'd know of the limitations he'd face in the future. Being shackled in the computer world would be far too painful a thing for someone who was really into it.
If you want to play in the Pros, you stay away from drugs. If you want to have your freedom on the internet, you stay away from illegal activities.
Or you become so damned good at covering your tracks that no one could ever find you.
You always hold your hands at an angle when you type, using a regular keyboard or no. (think about it-- expecially if you've got wide shoulders, it's impossible NOT to hold your wrists at an angle.) The split keyboard holds your wrists at a more natural angle (wrists angled inwards) while a regular keyboard angles your wrists outwards (v-shape) and puts more stress on the muscles, bones, and everything else in your wrist.
-Sara
Re:article illustrated something about family...
on
Tracking Mafiaboy
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
It's easy to observe that when children feel as though they are not having enough attention paid to them, they act out. Negative attention is better than feeling invisible. Some kids shoplift, some kids set things on fire, some kids torture small animals to feel as though they have an impact on things. Cracking or malicious-hacking is just another way of attracting attention. In a lot of ways, I'd say it's an even better way of attracting attention because of the impact that it can have, and because it (supposedly) involves some amount of skill.
If you read the entire article, you'll recall that the boy's brother was bragging about him, and his father was even somewhat proud of his son's 'skill'. Imagine how sweet this might be to a boy who has been ignored most of his life. Yeah. Upbringing and family life have a LOT to do with a kid's motivations for lashing out, be it digital or physical.
But the teen deserved to be grounded, you see--after checking to see if the parents' taxes were paid, he dragged the filing cabinet out into Times Square, put one of those little 10-year-old-girl's diary-locks on it, and a flashing neon sign that says "HERE IS THE KEY" on the side with the key gift-wrapped....
I think that's a more appropriate analogy. At least when Microsoft and "security" are mentioned in the same sentence. =]
I'm sorry, maybe it's just that it's 8:38AM and I'm overtired... But how is this a disadvantage? Also, I thought it was commonly-known information that you can get the source of opensource programs?
Last I checked Linux was still more secure than MS operating systems despite the fact that MS hoards their code like a magpie with a piece of tinfoil.
I think the best reason to encourage Linux in the gov't is Microsoft's attempt to justify closed-source Yeahhh.. The software is so insecure that the source code must be kept top-secret, but it should absolutely be used in the government. I wonder if everyone in the government has to have a Passport account, too?
And hey--isn't MS currently at court for being over-eager? Going after the gov't after that just seems like a little kid who's just gotten a spanking going right back to the cookie jar.
And the government attempts to regulate car, train, plane, and street-crossing. Not to mention medical care, the food industry, drugs, the way we raise our children, our forms of entertainment, our working conditions, our miscellaneous forms of transportation, the amount of radiation put off from our monitors/microwaves, etc.
No, I don't expect them to oversee everything. They don't oversee anything, they just put regulations in place and go after the groups who don't follow them--IF someone blows the whistle.
Rollercoasters fall under the category of "gosh, it could be dangerous. Let's regulate".
I like the insanity comment, though. That's another thing that the government tries to regulate. Sanity.
I agree. I 100% agree. The comment about protecting stupid people from themselves was a joke. (mostly)
The truth is that the government, in this incident, is attempting to protect people from something that could be quite dangerous. If people have died from rollercoaster-related injuries, then it's the government's duty to protect them because... When someone dies from a rollercoaster related injury what's the first thing we hear? A major public outlash about how the government should be more careful about inspecting the damned things.
And what, if you were to ask the common Joe about rollercoasters, would you hear? "Oh, they're perfectly safe. The government inspects them and wouldn't allow anything that would hurt us." This is in the face of the fact that the statement is quite blatantly untrue.
To err on the side of caution and regulate, or to face the potential backlash and anger of the voters? Hmm..
That is why we do not live in Arkansas, Atlanta, or New Jersey.:p Pick a state with laws that are the closest to how you would like them, and lobby your butt off to get the laws you don't like changed. If that doesn't work, build a rollercoaster in your backyard.. I'd put a link, but the poor guy already got slashdotted once.
and what tablet gave God the right to hand down a tablet? And what built the wood that built the house that....
I think that overall one of two things happened that gave the government the 'right' to regulate the people. Either the people chose the government through a long process involving butterfly ballots, or the government came in with guns and told the people that those who did not love them would be shot.
That does seem to be the most logical over-simplification of the past, no?
The "principles themselves" should *never* stand without explanation. The majority of people are incapable of understanding principles unless they are outlined in the simplest form possible. I merely said that the principles should not stand with faulty backing. Anytime someone uses a "rationale" that is potentially illegal it defeats the argument and makes the opposition more resolute. The defense of our rights should be taken seriously and the arguments against technology that will impinge upon them, or limitations of technology that could otherwise improve our ways of life should be clear and well thought out, not childish babblings about "Well I wanna" or "It's my right". THOSE cloud the issue.
The "Prohibit everything" approach is security via obscurity and denies us of quite a few things with legitimate uses.
The "Allow everything" approach is foolish, because it allows people to use their own best judgement on what should and should not be legal. Chaos.
The happy "medium" ground is explicitly prohibiting the extreme or harmful ranges of things. I think that this is what the current legislation is attempting to do by focusing on digital piracy. The thing is that they're going about it in all the wrong ways by creating more harm than they are preventing... THIS is what we need to convey to them. Not that "We'll do it anyway, and you can chase us further and further into the ground and we'll still find ways". More that we see where they're coming from but the methods they are talking about are the wrong approach.
The US constitution says you can believe what you want to believe. I think it also says something along the lines of... you've got a right to a fair trial?
My interpretation of this is that you can believe what you want to believe, but if you act upon something that has been determined to be illegal, we'll give you a pretty damned good chance to defend yourself before you end up in prison. =]
Religion is not a very good defense in the court system. I mean. The guys who slammed into the trade center supposedly did it becauase it was their religion.. Think the US Constitution will get any co-conspirators a free walk?
I completely agree on the convenience issue. I'm a lurker down at the used CD stores on St Marks, becuase I refuse to pay the $20 that seems to have become the average price of CDs in NY stores.
The problem is that the companies realize this, and instead of trying to bring down the prices to increase the convenience issue they're attacking the "convenience" part and trying to decrease the convenience of downloading music. They're also allowing it to carry over to other areas such as CD burning, broadband, etc.
It's like the whole damned prostitution thing. Instead of making it easier [like Nevada--regulating the prostitution] they crack down on it and push it further underground to make it even less convenient.
The more we bring it to their notice the further they'll push us.
In my opinion, we should band together and remain silent about the aspects of filesharing already deemed illegal, and instead raise hell in a UNIFIED VOICE about the aspects of our lives that are in danger of being crippled. Stop the cry to arms about "I can steal music if I want to." Instead yell out at the top of your lungs that you've genuine concerns about the rights which our government is preparing to deny us.
"Dear Senator:", we should write. "I do not support any legislation which will take away our right to innovate and advance the human race. I do not believe that this is in the best interest of any of us, nor do I believe that it furthers the interests of the copyright holders."
Doesn't that speak a lot louder than immature whinings about how we won't buy the darned CD in the first place?
Arguments for piracy are foolish and merely forward the agenda of those who are seeking to cripple us in ways that are far more important. Forget about your "so called right" to steal or borrow or copy music or programs in any form. It's irrelevant. It's already been determined that what you are doing is illegal. Get over it.
The important thing, and the thing that is in danger is our right to fair use, and our right to innovate and push the technology we have at our fingertips. The right to use CDs to back up our files, and the right to duplicate files that rightfully belong to us. The right to have POWERFUL hardware and software that is fully functional without limitations. And the right to determine how/for what purpose this hardware is used for.
Stop saying "I defend my right to shoot my neighbor because if I didn't have a gun I'd stab him" and start saying "I defend my right to bear firearms." You do not need to push home the point that technology is being used in illegal ways. You need to push home that certain bits of proposed legislation is going to HARM THE RIGHTS THAT WE HAVE.
Stop letting the REAL issues get so clouded by this tirade about capitalist pigs. We aren't going to change the world for the better this way, but maybe we can at least focus our arguments and keep the rights we have.
AOL's target market is "Non-brilliant people" (sorry, but it's a generalization that is normally true) who do not know how to copy/paste let alone restore the settings that the tech person set up that allowed them to sign onto their work computer. To top it off, if someone was using BYO access and paying the $9.x/month that AOL charges for that--and then 5.0 killed their real account settings, then they would end up paying a premium for AOL service until they were able to figure out how to restore their settings.
College is not about learning programs and applications, I'm well aware of this. It's about learning concepts and theories and history, and all of those wonderful things. Certification is about learning programs and applications and all those wonderful things.
College is great--a learning experience, an opportunity to do a variety of things, and yes- the paper opens doors like a magic skeleton key, whether it should or not.
College is a basis for training, not training itself. If the "basis" can be gotten elsewhere, or if someone already knows how to read music, that's when college becomes optional. And if someone is not dedicated and self-motivated to begin with, then college is rather pointless because those are things that are required but not taught in any college.
Anyone who would grasp at straws and say "Well SHE didn't do it, so I can be lazy and not do it" isn't going to succeed even with college. The diploma might open doors for them, but all bets are on the fact that the doors will quickly slam in their faces.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think it was "entrapment", and I don't think the original poster was saying that it was. I think that the point of the post could have been better put into a paragraph or three as opposed to a sentence.
The contest could keep records of those who participate, and all the attempts made, and then hand them over to a law enforcement agency to give the agency a "fingerprint" of the hackers involved. Since the contest was legal, the hackers would not have attempted to cover their tracks, and most likely would have used a trackable/real internet account. The law enforcement agency, once posessing the "fingerprint" of the attack could then compare it to similar (illegal) attacks and see if any of them had the same fingerprint.
The actual act of hacking a server that a company has opened up for hacking is not illegal and they could not be arrested for trying to hack that particular server, but they could then be brought under investigation for any crimes that were committed with similar methodology.
-Sara
Spam, while obnoxious (especially HTML emails) is not the biggest unsolicited waste of money/bandwidth, at least not that I'm experiencing.
/var with their own little morons_log which seems to update every second. 2: Klez. Average number of klez-bearing emails recieved per day across the network-15.(And it's a SMALL network.) Klez contains attachments of variable sizes. Average number of minutes spent per day reassuring panic-stricken family members/co-workers/non-techie friends: 5. Cost of antivirus software per Windows compuer on network: $50. Time spent downloading antivirus updates--too much.
Byte for byte, the largest wastes of bandwidth I'm experiencing can be attributed to two categories: 1: Windows SysAdmins who refuse/don't know how to patch their systems against the likes of nimda and code red. They also waste space in
Spam can be blood-boilingly infuriating and push us to the point of wanting to ressurect public hangings, but I think that by and large the two categories I list are the biggest wastes of everything... And I'll be damned if I can find a way to opt out.
-Sara
Hm. But isn't sending unsolicited commercial advertisements to cellphones, or calling cellphones as a telemarketer illegal, since the reciepient has to pay for the call/spam? I'm not sure, but I thought it was.
-Sara
Hmm.. I think it will be a battle of perceptions. On one hand we have "United" and "standards", on the other hand everyone knows that it's an effort of SuSE, Caldera, Connectiva, and TurboLinux. None of which I would put on my servers or my network for more than a few days of "play".
If the players included Debian or Slackware then my opinion would immediately fly from "Yeah. Cool. Another distro" to "Hey, great. Can't wait to play with it and see how it goes".
I'm not entirely sure how the industry will recieve United Linux, and until I'm sure I'm not switching any of the boxes under my control over. Somehow, I think the rest of the industry will be playing the same game of 'wait and see'.
You're absolutely right about businesses going for RedHat. Businesses are fickle, though. If United Linux can gain the support of vendors (both hardware and software) and capture the interest of sysadmins then the business world will float that way.
-Sara
That's only true if the lock is on the door of a large record or software company. The DMCA doesn't protect individual locks.
;)
-Sara
I'm not going to get into the cliche argument about "cracker" vs "hacker". Yes, we all start out as "script kiddies"--using the tools that others have created for us. Some of them use 'em to cause harm, others use them to learn and expand.
The distinction between the two might be foggy at first, I think that all of us have done something "just plain destructive" sometime in our life, be it putting whipped cream in a mailbox, gluing a lock, getting someone kicked off of AOL, or trying to break into someone's machine. I think, though, that we've also quickly grown bored of our more juvinile pursuits and moved on to other areas. Repairing our cars, building a computer from throw-away parts, inventing a better text editor, or starting Yet Another Blog (tm).
The line is clear between "mischief" and "maliciousness", and those who pass over it have no excuses. They are criminally responsible and should be treated as such.
That said, yes. It is a shame that those with more knowledge aren't as willing to share. However, I've found that if you're bright and eager and willing to do a bit of preliminary research you'll absolutely find people who are willing to share--even if it's just stepping you through the first setup of a new OS. It's the people who are arrogant little twits that get cast by the wayside... As they should be.
-Sara
Hm. Is your friend a slashdotter, too by any chance? I've gotten approximately 10 klezzy's in the past 10 days from various user-of-slashdot email addresses (most of which contain slashdot's anti-spam garbungling) I've also apparently had a lot of klez sent out using a spoofed address containing the domain which I primarily use as my email address when I post to /.
/. Talk about a stupid virus--most of us don't even use windows. :p
Meethinks Klez likes getting email addresses from
-Sara
I used to get major shoulder/upper back problems, then I got a desk/chair set that had three things--1: a monitor stand that allowed the monitor to be below the desk surface so that if I were to sit up straight and look directly forward my eyes would go over the top of the monitor. This allows me to tilt the monitor up slightly and view it by looking down. 2: drop-down keyboard tray of adjustable height, positioned so that if I were to sit with my elbows bent at a 90 degree angle I'd be able to type without any additional bending. 3: a hard-backed hard-seated chair with adjustable height and lower back support.
Because I'm narrow-shouldered I don't find it necessary to have an ergonomic keyboard, and in fact would most likely find that it would cause additional stress to my arms/body, as it would introduce an extreme posturing of the wrists.
It all depends on the persons individual needs, but just changing the keyboard isn't going to change everything. Other things need to be taken into consideration as well. Also--everyone's ergonomics are different. If at all possible, people should choose their own working environment, and not be forced to conform to what others have found affective. Of course, if employers were to allow that extensive of an ability to customize... we might see a sudden increase in the sales of laptops and beanbags.
-Sara
Agreed. The article says that the kid had obviously researched his targets rather thoroughly. This takes time, planning, understanding, and an extreme desire for attention.
He was a script kiddie, though. He took the scripts and apps of other people and used them for what he did. He did not seem to have a thorough understanding of the things he was doing, the article says he had to type commands several times before they'd work. I don't know about you, but even things I use casually are embedded in my fingertips, and having to retype a command isn't a very common occurence. Having to retype it 3-4 times is a non-occurence.
If the kid had been a real hacker (using the geek-culture definition of the word...) He would have taken that time and desire for recognition and learned new OSes thoroughly, written a program or ten, or taken up a more positive pursuit. Or at the very least, I believe that he would have been too afraid of doing what he did--because he'd know of the limitations he'd face in the future. Being shackled in the computer world would be far too painful a thing for someone who was really into it.
If you want to play in the Pros, you stay away from drugs. If you want to have your freedom on the internet, you stay away from illegal activities.
Or you become so damned good at covering your tracks that no one could ever find you.
-Sara
You always hold your hands at an angle when you type, using a regular keyboard or no. (think about it-- expecially if you've got wide shoulders, it's impossible NOT to hold your wrists at an angle.) The split keyboard holds your wrists at a more natural angle (wrists angled inwards) while a regular keyboard angles your wrists outwards (v-shape) and puts more stress on the muscles, bones, and everything else in your wrist.
-Sara
It's easy to observe that when children feel as though they are not having enough attention paid to them, they act out. Negative attention is better than feeling invisible. Some kids shoplift, some kids set things on fire, some kids torture small animals to feel as though they have an impact on things. Cracking or malicious-hacking is just another way of attracting attention. In a lot of ways, I'd say it's an even better way of attracting attention because of the impact that it can have, and because it (supposedly) involves some amount of skill.
If you read the entire article, you'll recall that the boy's brother was bragging about him, and his father was even somewhat proud of his son's 'skill'. Imagine how sweet this might be to a boy who has been ignored most of his life. Yeah. Upbringing and family life have a LOT to do with a kid's motivations for lashing out, be it digital or physical.
-Sara
But the teen deserved to be grounded, you see--after checking to see if the parents' taxes were paid, he dragged the filing cabinet out into Times Square, put one of those little 10-year-old-girl's diary-locks on it, and a flashing neon sign that says "HERE IS THE KEY" on the side with the key gift-wrapped....
I think that's a more appropriate analogy. At least when Microsoft and "security" are mentioned in the same sentence. =]
-Sara
I'm sorry, maybe it's just that it's 8:38AM and I'm overtired... But how is this a disadvantage? Also, I thought it was commonly-known information that you can get the source of opensource programs?
Last I checked Linux was still more secure than MS operating systems despite the fact that MS hoards their code like a magpie with a piece of tinfoil.
-Sara
I think the best reason to encourage Linux in the gov't is Microsoft's attempt to justify closed-source Yeahhh.. The software is so insecure that the source code must be kept top-secret, but it should absolutely be used in the government. I wonder if everyone in the government has to have a Passport account, too?
And hey--isn't MS currently at court for being over-eager? Going after the gov't after that just seems like a little kid who's just gotten a spanking going right back to the cookie jar.
-Sara
And the government attempts to regulate car, train, plane, and street-crossing. Not to mention medical care, the food industry, drugs, the way we raise our children, our forms of entertainment, our working conditions, our miscellaneous forms of transportation, the amount of radiation put off from our monitors/microwaves, etc.
No, I don't expect them to oversee everything. They don't oversee anything, they just put regulations in place and go after the groups who don't follow them--IF someone blows the whistle.
Rollercoasters fall under the category of "gosh, it could be dangerous. Let's regulate".
I like the insanity comment, though. That's another thing that the government tries to regulate. Sanity.
-Sara
I agree. I 100% agree. The comment about protecting stupid people from themselves was a joke. (mostly)
The truth is that the government, in this incident, is attempting to protect people from something that could be quite dangerous. If people have died from rollercoaster-related injuries, then it's the government's duty to protect them because... When someone dies from a rollercoaster related injury what's the first thing we hear? A major public outlash about how the government should be more careful about inspecting the damned things.
And what, if you were to ask the common Joe about rollercoasters, would you hear? "Oh, they're perfectly safe. The government inspects them and wouldn't allow anything that would hurt us." This is in the face of the fact that the statement is quite blatantly untrue.
To err on the side of caution and regulate, or to face the potential backlash and anger of the voters? Hmm..
-Sara
That is why we do not live in Arkansas, Atlanta, or New Jersey. :p Pick a state with laws that are the closest to how you would like them, and lobby your butt off to get the laws you don't like changed. If that doesn't work, build a rollercoaster in your backyard.. I'd put a link, but the poor guy already got slashdotted once.
-Sara
and what tablet gave God the right to hand down a tablet? And what built the wood that built the house that....
I think that overall one of two things happened that gave the government the 'right' to regulate the people. Either the people chose the government through a long process involving butterfly ballots, or the government came in with guns and told the people that those who did not love them would be shot.
That does seem to be the most logical over-simplification of the past, no?
-Sara
If that argument worked, do you think that marajuana, heroin, meth, e, etc. etc. etc. would be illegal?
The government's job is to attempt to preserve the lives of those who are willing to risk them.
And those who are willing to risk them have the job of coming up with new un-regulated ways of risking them.
Speeds along the process of innovation, and adds some interesting entries to the Darwin Awards timeline.
-Sara
The "principles themselves" should *never* stand without explanation. The majority of people are incapable of understanding principles unless they are outlined in the simplest form possible. I merely said that the principles should not stand with faulty backing. Anytime someone uses a "rationale" that is potentially illegal it defeats the argument and makes the opposition more resolute. The defense of our rights should be taken seriously and the arguments against technology that will impinge upon them, or limitations of technology that could otherwise improve our ways of life should be clear and well thought out, not childish babblings about "Well I wanna" or "It's my right". THOSE cloud the issue.
The "Prohibit everything" approach is security via obscurity and denies us of quite a few things with legitimate uses.
The "Allow everything" approach is foolish, because it allows people to use their own best judgement on what should and should not be legal. Chaos.
The happy "medium" ground is explicitly prohibiting the extreme or harmful ranges of things. I think that this is what the current legislation is attempting to do by focusing on digital piracy. The thing is that they're going about it in all the wrong ways by creating more harm than they are preventing... THIS is what we need to convey to them. Not that "We'll do it anyway, and you can chase us further and further into the ground and we'll still find ways". More that we see where they're coming from but the methods they are talking about are the wrong approach.
-Sara
The US constitution says you can believe what you want to believe. I think it also says something along the lines of... you've got a right to a fair trial?
My interpretation of this is that you can believe what you want to believe, but if you act upon something that has been determined to be illegal, we'll give you a pretty damned good chance to defend yourself before you end up in prison. =]
Religion is not a very good defense in the court system. I mean. The guys who slammed into the trade center supposedly did it becauase it was their religion.. Think the US Constitution will get any co-conspirators a free walk?
-Sara
I completely agree on the convenience issue. I'm a lurker down at the used CD stores on St Marks, becuase I refuse to pay the $20 that seems to have become the average price of CDs in NY stores.
The problem is that the companies realize this, and instead of trying to bring down the prices to increase the convenience issue they're attacking the "convenience" part and trying to decrease the convenience of downloading music. They're also allowing it to carry over to other areas such as CD burning, broadband, etc.
It's like the whole damned prostitution thing. Instead of making it easier [like Nevada--regulating the prostitution] they crack down on it and push it further underground to make it even less convenient.
The more we bring it to their notice the further they'll push us.
In my opinion, we should band together and remain silent about the aspects of filesharing already deemed illegal, and instead raise hell in a UNIFIED VOICE about the aspects of our lives that are in danger of being crippled. Stop the cry to arms about "I can steal music if I want to." Instead yell out at the top of your lungs that you've genuine concerns about the rights which our government is preparing to deny us.
"Dear Senator:", we should write. "I do not support any legislation which will take away our right to innovate and advance the human race. I do not believe that this is in the best interest of any of us, nor do I believe that it furthers the interests of the copyright holders."
Doesn't that speak a lot louder than immature whinings about how we won't buy the darned CD in the first place?
-Sara
Arguments for piracy are foolish and merely forward the agenda of those who are seeking to cripple us in ways that are far more important. Forget about your "so called right" to steal or borrow or copy music or programs in any form. It's irrelevant. It's already been determined that what you are doing is illegal. Get over it.
The important thing, and the thing that is in danger is our right to fair use, and our right to innovate and push the technology we have at our fingertips. The right to use CDs to back up our files, and the right to duplicate files that rightfully belong to us. The right to have POWERFUL hardware and software that is fully functional without limitations. And the right to determine how/for what purpose this hardware is used for.
Stop saying "I defend my right to shoot my neighbor because if I didn't have a gun I'd stab him" and start saying "I defend my right to bear firearms." You do not need to push home the point that technology is being used in illegal ways. You need to push home that certain bits of proposed legislation is going to HARM THE RIGHTS THAT WE HAVE.
Stop letting the REAL issues get so clouded by this tirade about capitalist pigs. We aren't going to change the world for the better this way, but maybe we can at least focus our arguments and keep the rights we have.
-Sara
AOL's target market is "Non-brilliant people" (sorry, but it's a generalization that is normally true) who do not know how to copy/paste let alone restore the settings that the tech person set up that allowed them to sign onto their work computer. To top it off, if someone was using BYO access and paying the $9.x/month that AOL charges for that--and then 5.0 killed their real account settings, then they would end up paying a premium for AOL service until they were able to figure out how to restore their settings.
How is this not damaging?
-Sara
College is not about learning programs and applications, I'm well aware of this. It's about learning concepts and theories and history, and all of those wonderful things. Certification is about learning programs and applications and all those wonderful things.
College is great--a learning experience, an opportunity to do a variety of things, and yes- the paper opens doors like a magic skeleton key, whether it should or not.
College is a basis for training, not training itself. If the "basis" can be gotten elsewhere, or if someone already knows how to read music, that's when college becomes optional. And if someone is not dedicated and self-motivated to begin with, then college is rather pointless because those are things that are required but not taught in any college.
Anyone who would grasp at straws and say "Well SHE didn't do it, so I can be lazy and not do it" isn't going to succeed even with college. The diploma might open doors for them, but all bets are on the fact that the doors will quickly slam in their faces.
-Sara