ouch, you never seen proper encryption? If MS would do it properly, one wouldn't just be able to 'debug' the doc in order to find out what it means
Encrypting a file so you can't read it at all is easy, but this is different. In this hypothetical scenario, MS (or whoever) wants to allow only "authorized" programs to be able to decrypt and view content. To defeat it you need to watch the program doing the decryption sufficiently closely to figure out exactly what it's doing. A primary goal of Palladium is to remove that capability, thus creating a "trusted client". (As in, third parties can trust your computer to not trust you).
Note, by the way, that Microsoft could implement the above bullshit right now if they wanted to without waiting.
They could try to, but it wouldn't be effective because users have full root (er, Administrator) access to their machines, and if necessary could use debuggers and/or virtual machines to figure out how Word is decrypting documents and create a nonproprietary replacement. But when your computer is "protected" by Palladium, applications will be black boxes that you can't look inside, and it will be much more conducive to that sort of behavior. The document addresses that point when discussing MP3 players:
This could all be done today - Microsoft would just have to download a patch into your player - but once TCPA / Palladium makes it hard for people to tamper with the player software, and easier for Microsoft to control upgrades and patches, it will be harder for you to escape, and will therefore be a more attractive way of doing business.
That document is a load of scare mongering crap.
It definitely presents the worst-case scenarios, but everything it describes is theoretically possible.
At the risk of overstating the case, I do think this is a further example of market forces alone being very far from the wholly benign influence they're so often touted as being.
Note that idiocies like this are only possible because the Patent Office, a government agency, has displayed spectacular incompetence. Intellectual property is a government granted monopoly, and when it is abused there's almost always plenty of blame to be shared by both the public and private sector.
In a few years, due to FCC demands, analog broadcasting will go away.
I'm very confused by the orrery of errors being perpetrated by the Hollywood cartel and the FCC, but don't those regulations only apply to over-the-air broadcasts, leaving cable unaffected? I remember reading somewhere fairly recently that cable companies were blowing HDTV off.
I'd consider it. (Although regarding your first point, I'd try to eliminate subsidies rather than "equalizing" them). The last one is an excellent idea. I don't really care if EvilCorp donates $10 million because they agree with Sen. Scumbag's publicly stated positions; the problem is when they donate the money for the specific purpose of enccouraging him to pass favorable legislation which invariably ends up screwing everyone else.
Having to behave like honest politicians is clearly unacceptable to the likes of Cheney and Bush.
I agree this sort of thing goes on all the time, but stop trying to make it a partisan issue. Ken Lay was also buddies with Bill Clinton, and let's not forget Hillary's secret health care task force.
The new campaign laws say flat out that me, Dan Heskett, a private citizen, cannot go to a newspaper and buy an ad within 90 days of a primary election or 60 days of a general election. Candidates can, but I can't. That is a clear cut abridgement of the free press.
Absolutely. The Supreme Court will strike this "reform" down even faster than they did the CDA. I'll be amazed if the ruling isn't 9-0.
However, there is no interstate commerce, nor any commerce whatsoever, so any law made by the federal government on the subject ought be considered null and void, as it's a blatant and ridiculous 10th Amendment violation and an absurd encroachment on the sovereignty of the State of New Jersey.
Thank you. It's refreshing to see that there are a few people who still understand and respect the Constitution, even if both parties generally consider it an anachronism.
You have an extremely short memory if you think infringements of civil liberties just began after 9/11. The Clinton administration in particular has very little to be proud of in this area. We encryption regulations that made people into criminal arms traffickers for pasting 4 lines of perl (which Ashcroft actually opposed), Gore's Clipper Chip which would have given the government a backdoor into every electronic communication, record numbers of non-violent drug offenders thrown in jail, and Clinton's attempt to use the Oklahoma City bombing to censor talk radio.
(Obediance to authority - Conservative\Bush) vs. the 'nurturant parent' mode (Empathy and helping others -Progressive\Clinton, for example)
That's an extremely simplistic characterization. There are at least two major types of conservatives; the "law and order at all costs" types which I'd agree fits Ashcroft, and the "limited government and individual liberty" psuedo-libertarians (or "South Park Republicans"). If you want to see the stark differences between them, go to Free Republic and read threads about the Patriot Act or drug legalization. It can get vicious.
The phrase "Homeland Security" pisses me off.
Me too. I'd actually prefer "Domestic Security"; "Homeland" sounds rather Orwellian for some reason.
The actions in Korea and Viet Nam were not about human rights or freeing people, they were about industry and furthering a political agenda - wiping out 'communism'.
Arguably true, but wiping out communism was a good thing whatever the motivation. Communist governments murdered tens of millions of their own citizens in the past century, and eliminating them was a great service to humanity.
The U.S. action with the U.N. in Bosnia and Kosovo were primarily humanitarian actions.
I'm glad you mentioned that. Saddam's record on human rights (use of chemical weapons, state-sanctioned rape and torture, etc) is far worse than anything Slobodan has been accused of. Why is there no call from the left to punish Saddam on those grounds? Does having national interests automatically preclude the US from acting?
If there had been a republican administration in power at that time, we would not have helped.
First, deliberately striking civilian targets (and accidentally striking more) is a curious definition of "helping". Second, the mission to provide aid to Somalia initiated by Bush I is a counterexample. Of course Clinton tried to turn it into a nation-building exercise with disastrous results, but that's another matter.
Everyone gets more freedom as defined by the dictionary under GPL because one person no longer has the 'right' to take everyone else's freedoms away.
Proprietary software cannot "take" your freedom. Nobody is forcing you to purchase or use it. If I purchase a piece of proprietary software, it is because I am willing to voluntarily agree to not copy and redistribute it. It appears that you wish to remove my freedom to make that decision.
At the keyrate of the last days of RC5-64 it would take even less than the predicted duration of RC5-64 when it started using RC5-56 keyrates as a measurement.
If I'm reading their charts right, the rate at the end of RC5-64 was around 250 Gkeys/sec. That's roughly 2^38, so to search half the keyspace of RC5-72 at the same rate would take 2^33 seconds, or around 270 years. Until computers get a lot faster, any work done on RC5-72 will just be a drop in the very large bucket.
RC5-64 took 4 years, and this has a keyspace that's 256 times larger. Even if we assume that computers are 4 times faster now than the average speed at which RC5-64 keys were processed, we're still looking at 256 years to completion. It doesn't seem like it makes any sense to start until computers are at least 20 times faster.
Next year, those same 1% will take home an extra $26 billion
Actually they will "take home" the same amount, it's just that slightly less will subsequently be confiscated from them. You do know that the richest 1% already pay a much higher percentage of taxes than they earn in income, right? And that Bush's tax cuts made the system more progressive? Besides, they're not going to put the money they save in taxes under their mattresses. They will invest the money in private enterprises, thereby creating new jobs, products, and innovations.
The program has provided jobs to a lot of people on the floor
Broken window fallacy. If taxpayers had been allowed to keep the money, they would have spent and invested it elsewhere, which also would have created jobs.
This money isn't spent on warfare, defense etc. At least they tried to spend with good intentions
Why isn't it a good intention to protect citizens from external threats? Yes, there's lots of wasteful military spending, but some of it is necessary and proper.
Features that I sorely miss from mozilla/phoenix while using Chimera
You did notice Chimera's version number, right? Quite a bit less than 1.0. If you want to point out missing features, that's fine, but calling it a "piece of crap" is completely unwarranted.
If unions can improve the quality of life and make it easier for us (in the US) to get training (for example) then what is wrong with that?
TANSTAAFL. Take a look at the economic growth and lack thereof in most of Europe.
Of course all of this becomes a moot point when you consider that there are countries like India where people are willing to take our jobs and do them for something like $4 an hour.
True, especially when our government happily runs corporate welfare programs to have those workers come to the US and work in what is essentially indentured servitude. I don't want a traditional labor union micromanaging the employer-employee relationship, but I can see having a guild-type organization that speaks out on larger issues, such as the abuse of the H1-B program.
Partially due to idiotic moves by Apple like making the only expandable system be dual CPU.
Yeah, I hate it when computer manufacturers try to shove additional CPUs into my boxes.
Seriously, the reason for this is that Motorola has displayed amazing ineptitude in PowerPC development, so duals are the only way to stay competitive with 3GHz x86 processors.
They were violating a civil contract, which is different. Regardless, the point is not that they were innocent, but that the force used was massively disproportionate. Would you support cops breaking down the door of someone who had been seen exceeding the speed limit by 5 mph? After all, he was breaking the law, right?
they were transferring large amounts of data. Sounds to me like they were pirates and hackers, trading in illicit files
Obviously, because nobody has a legitimate need to transfer large files.
Slashdot Mirror
Wow, that sucks. Why doesn't he sue the crap out of the girl and her parents?
Encrypting a file so you can't read it at all is easy, but this is different. In this hypothetical scenario, MS (or whoever) wants to allow only "authorized" programs to be able to decrypt and view content. To defeat it you need to watch the program doing the decryption sufficiently closely to figure out exactly what it's doing. A primary goal of Palladium is to remove that capability, thus creating a "trusted client". (As in, third parties can trust your computer to not trust you).
They could try to, but it wouldn't be effective because users have full root (er, Administrator) access to their machines, and if necessary could use debuggers and/or virtual machines to figure out how Word is decrypting documents and create a nonproprietary replacement. But when your computer is "protected" by Palladium, applications will be black boxes that you can't look inside, and it will be much more conducive to that sort of behavior. The document addresses that point when discussing MP3 players:
That document is a load of scare mongering crap.
It definitely presents the worst-case scenarios, but everything it describes is theoretically possible.
Note that idiocies like this are only possible because the Patent Office, a government agency, has displayed spectacular incompetence. Intellectual property is a government granted monopoly, and when it is abused there's almost always plenty of blame to be shared by both the public and private sector.
I'm very confused by the orrery of errors being perpetrated by the Hollywood cartel and the FCC, but don't those regulations only apply to over-the-air broadcasts, leaving cable unaffected? I remember reading somewhere fairly recently that cable companies were blowing HDTV off.
Microsoft's market cap is around $300 billion, so 500,000 slashdotters would have to kick in $300,000 each for a controlling interest.
I'd consider it. (Although regarding your first point, I'd try to eliminate subsidies rather than "equalizing" them). The last one is an excellent idea. I don't really care if EvilCorp donates $10 million because they agree with Sen. Scumbag's publicly stated positions; the problem is when they donate the money for the specific purpose of enccouraging him to pass favorable legislation which invariably ends up screwing everyone else.
Interesting. What about "independent" ads paid for by entities other than registered voters?
I agree this sort of thing goes on all the time, but stop trying to make it a partisan issue. Ken Lay was also buddies with Bill Clinton, and let's not forget Hillary's secret health care task force.
Absolutely. The Supreme Court will strike this "reform" down even faster than they did the CDA. I'll be amazed if the ruling isn't 9-0.
Thank you. It's refreshing to see that there are a few people who still understand and respect the Constitution, even if both parties generally consider it an anachronism.
(Obediance to authority - Conservative\Bush) vs. the 'nurturant parent' mode (Empathy and helping others -Progressive\Clinton, for example)
That's an extremely simplistic characterization. There are at least two major types of conservatives; the "law and order at all costs" types which I'd agree fits Ashcroft, and the "limited government and individual liberty" psuedo-libertarians (or "South Park Republicans"). If you want to see the stark differences between them, go to Free Republic and read threads about the Patriot Act or drug legalization. It can get vicious.
The phrase "Homeland Security" pisses me off.
Me too. I'd actually prefer "Domestic Security"; "Homeland" sounds rather Orwellian for some reason.
The actions in Korea and Viet Nam were not about human rights or freeing people, they were about industry and furthering a political agenda - wiping out 'communism'.
Arguably true, but wiping out communism was a good thing whatever the motivation. Communist governments murdered tens of millions of their own citizens in the past century, and eliminating them was a great service to humanity.
The U.S. action with the U.N. in Bosnia and Kosovo were primarily humanitarian actions.
I'm glad you mentioned that. Saddam's record on human rights (use of chemical weapons, state-sanctioned rape and torture, etc) is far worse than anything Slobodan has been accused of. Why is there no call from the left to punish Saddam on those grounds? Does having national interests automatically preclude the US from acting?
If there had been a republican administration in power at that time, we would not have helped.
First, deliberately striking civilian targets (and accidentally striking more) is a curious definition of "helping". Second, the mission to provide aid to Somalia initiated by Bush I is a counterexample. Of course Clinton tried to turn it into a nation-building exercise with disastrous results, but that's another matter.
Wasn't Darla a vampire when Angel slept with her?
Proprietary software cannot "take" your freedom. Nobody is forcing you to purchase or use it. If I purchase a piece of proprietary software, it is because I am willing to voluntarily agree to not copy and redistribute it. It appears that you wish to remove my freedom to make that decision.
Thanks, that's exactly what I was trying to say. "Principle of Optimum Slackitude", I like it.
If I'm reading their charts right, the rate at the end of RC5-64 was around 250 Gkeys/sec. That's roughly 2^38, so to search half the keyspace of RC5-72 at the same rate would take 2^33 seconds, or around 270 years. Until computers get a lot faster, any work done on RC5-72 will just be a drop in the very large bucket.
RC5-64 took 4 years, and this has a keyspace that's 256 times larger. Even if we assume that computers are 4 times faster now than the average speed at which RC5-64 keys were processed, we're still looking at 256 years to completion. It doesn't seem like it makes any sense to start until computers are at least 20 times faster.
Actually they will "take home" the same amount, it's just that slightly less will subsequently be confiscated from them. You do know that the richest 1% already pay a much higher percentage of taxes than they earn in income, right? And that Bush's tax cuts made the system more progressive? Besides, they're not going to put the money they save in taxes under their mattresses. They will invest the money in private enterprises, thereby creating new jobs, products, and innovations.
4. Allow the people that actually earned the money to keep a bit more of it.
Broken window fallacy. If taxpayers had been allowed to keep the money, they would have spent and invested it elsewhere, which also would have created jobs.
This money isn't spent on warfare, defense etc. At least they tried to spend with good intentions
Why isn't it a good intention to protect citizens from external threats? Yes, there's lots of wasteful military spending, but some of it is necessary and proper.
You did notice Chimera's version number, right? Quite a bit less than 1.0. If you want to point out missing features, that's fine, but calling it a "piece of crap" is completely unwarranted.
TANSTAAFL. Take a look at the economic growth and lack thereof in most of Europe.
Of course all of this becomes a moot point when you consider that there are countries like India where people are willing to take our jobs and do them for something like $4 an hour.
True, especially when our government happily runs corporate welfare programs to have those workers come to the US and work in what is essentially indentured servitude. I don't want a traditional labor union micromanaging the employer-employee relationship, but I can see having a guild-type organization that speaks out on larger issues, such as the abuse of the H1-B program.
Yeah, I hate it when computer manufacturers try to shove additional CPUs into my boxes.
Seriously, the reason for this is that Motorola has displayed amazing ineptitude in PowerPC development, so duals are the only way to stay competitive with 3GHz x86 processors.
They were violating a civil contract, which is different. Regardless, the point is not that they were innocent, but that the force used was massively disproportionate. Would you support cops breaking down the door of someone who had been seen exceeding the speed limit by 5 mph? After all, he was breaking the law, right?
they were transferring large amounts of data. Sounds to me like they were pirates and hackers, trading in illicit files
Obviously, because nobody has a legitimate need to transfer large files.
All the stores I've gotten cards from wanted a full name, address, and driver's license number. Fortunately, they don't verify any of it.