The problem is that it is the searches which are revealing. It isn't possible to release complete search data AND protect privacy of all users because people search for things that are important to them, i.e., the searches are self revealing. That's why replacing usernames with a numerical identifier was so ineffectual for so many users.
As an aside, I imported the data into a mysql database. I've never messed with that much data before and it was a good learning experience with respect to grep, awk, and sed and converting the tab deliminated files into something I could import into mysql. I do wonder however, if there is a way to just import the tab deliminated file without adding "insert" to lines and escaping the ' ( ) and ; characters that appear in the data. Any experts have a hint? On my athlon 2200+ with 512mb of ram, each search of the data takes about a minute to complete. It's actually faster to just grep for lower numbered userids and then kill grep once the output shows.
I noticed lots of searches for an exact url -- but maybe it is some form of safetynet against making a typo and getting suckered. AOLers are juicy targets, so searching for the url and clicking a link after AOL typochecks wouldn't be a bad idea... if indeed AOL typochecks.
You realize of course, the context of the "kill the lawyers" quote is that the act of killing all the lawyers would aid in the establishment of a tyrannical reign. In other words, Shakespeare was saying that in some way, there are lawyers who protect freedom.
True, some lawyers work for the RIAA. By the same token, some programmers make spam software. Most lawyers don't work for the RIAA and many work for people's freedoms. Most programmers don't help spammers, and many actively work against spam. I think you should get the point -- it isn't the profession, it's the individual that goes bad. Fact is, by and large it is "people" who are cruel and vindictive.
As someone who has started his own buisiness, and who knows many who have also done so (it's common in my field), let me say this: it's one of the scariest things you can do. I left a cush state gov't job -- a steady check 2x per month, great benefits, retirment etc. etc. I had enough money saved up to support myself for a while OR put a down payment on a house (not both). I chose to start a business -- when you're income drops to zero and your monthly expenses double (office rent etc), you get terrified. Tons of "little guys" run their own business, whether plumbers, landscapers, lawyers, doctors, or dentists -- running a business is open to every educational level.
It annoys me when people who have never actually tried starting a business, get all preachy it (maybe you have and you're destined to be a brilliant innovator). A previous poster was right -- wage slaves don't risk much (and hence stand little to gain). People who try to start their own business often do risk everything. I risked my entire life savings when I could have bought a house instead. My partner mortgaged every last cent out of her home, as did one of my friends. Seriously, take everything you have, everything you can borrow, and then gamble it. Once you do that, evaluate how you feel about this whole issue. Now, I'll certainly listen to my receptionist's suggestions about this or that -- but I'm still making the decisions because I'm the one who has everything at risk. If I go out of business, that's huge for me -- she'll just get a different job answering the phone elsewhere. That's a month's job searching level of inconvenience. I'm out everything. Since I risk more, I have no issue with the idea that I stand to get more.
Maybe a problem, likely not. Mac users tend to go nuts about manufacturing errors more so than others. Anyway, I got a macbook a couple weeks ago -- has the magsafe connector. I recall not too long ago tons of news about the magsafe burning up at the computer side. I noticed that when I pull the connector straight out from the computer, it stresses the joint where the wire and plug meet. Thing about a magnetic connection is that it is hard to pull the two sides straight apart, but easy to break if attacked from an angle. So now I just push on one side of the connector and it breaks away without difficulty or wire stress.
I know everyone always claims to be gentle on their machines, but when I look at other people's laptops -- I suspect the truth is much rougher. Anyway, don't yank the adapter around by its cord and I bet it'll fine.
I realize it's a joke, but still feel like commenting. "Perversions" are like masturbation. Everyone engages to some extent, but is too shy to admit it. I'm hardly surprised that we'd discover AOLers, whatever their technical incapabilities are, have sexual interests.
You're right. Nudity is a pretty good litmus test. I don't think nudist colonies pose an issue however. For example, you could have a bunch of naked people in your living room (we can dream right?) and while amongst the group, there is no expecation that people will not see you're birthday suit, there is still an expectation that people outside the nude group will be excluded. Thus the group has an expectation of privacy. Typically, nudist colonies are secluded in some way so that the nudists as a group, can expect privacy from outsiders, but can't expect others in the group not to see the naughty bits.
You realize of course the only reason the police misconduct didn't land this guy in jail is the publicity? We should be THANKING "Slashdot's tinfoil/civil rights/Bush-Hater's Club/EFF community". Otherwise, he'd be just another person run through the system unfairly.
Ask yourself this, what would happen to you if you did this to some cop cameras:
Gannon said he hopes police will return and reinstall the security cameras, which they seized from his home during a search after his arrest. "They broke them off the mounts and ripped the wires right out of the wall," Gannon said. "They took it, they can return it, that's my feeling."
This was outside in a place open to view by the public and within earshot of neighbors right? Yes -- it was on his front porch. The cops have no reasonable expectation of privacy when they're in plain site in the public view from a common vid-cam. Neither does anybody. Sure, caveats exist, e.g., upskirt wouldn't fit in "normal". What disturbs me is that people seem so willing to relinquish their rights. Comments such as yours bode poorly for the future -- a future where the state is free to do as it wishes and citizens must always be careful lest some simple harmless act lands them in jail.
Sorry to double post but I just listened to that ringtone. I'm almost 38 and it made me cringe and immediately hit pause -- I'm in a noisy room with a computer that has a tiny single unamplified speaker.
I have an acer LCD and I can hear the inverter or whatever inside makes a whine. Not anywhere as loud as crt though. A long long time ago, I had a crappy job working in a Juvie detention home. The kids hated me because I could hear the TV from the other side of the building -- they'd try to sneak in some tube time in the hours it was supposed to be off.
If you don't have to do anything special to see the thing/act/etc., no expectation of privacy. If you have to do something out of the ordinary, e.g., open a bag or set up a complicated mirror/camera system to see into areas that are normally beyond view (up-skirt), you have a heightened expectation of privacy. When you walk down the street, you expect people to see you. When you walk down the street, you don't expect people to stick their hand in your pocket and start digging around. The division between public and private is actually pretty easy to define.
How can the police be sure that the photos aren't going to be used to identify police officers for later revenge attacks?
The same could be said of any picture taken of anyone in a public place. Shall we ban cameras completely? Allow only nature photography? No pictures of architecture -- might be casing the joint. Anyway, what a ridiculous statement.
The best cheat is to charge someone rent on a property that person owns. Even if it's only a $7 payoff, it rocks way more than palming $500 from the bank. The really hard part is not laughing before the next dice roll.
And for stalkers out there, make it easy to establish a victims common route. I can't see how finding a stolen car here and there could possibly outweigh the negative implications of this technology.
With the BBQ, there is some expectation of a quid pro quo -- you invite your buddies over and in a vague sense, probably expect your buddies to invite you over some time and stick a "free" beer in your hand. Now, people don't go around keeping spreadsheets of how many beers their buddies owe them, but we've all probably experienced the friend who becomes a mooch and eventually, the mooch isn't invited to more BBQs. In essence, the mooch got a few free lunches by violating a common social expectation.
Don't be a fruitcake. Given the present administration, if you don't presume they're violating civil liberties to the fullest extent possible shy of tipping over to police state, then you're a fool. Personally, if I heard of something this administration did that was right, I'd think it a hoax. Note: this post is not humor.
Awsome investment. At this earnings level, it will only take 166 quarters of revenue to pay for a share. Expenses of course, will stretch that out to much more than that 41 year figure. I just don't understand how people value stocks.
Put it this way: I have a computer, a PDA, a PSP and an MP3 CD player in my car.... I buy CDs for my own consumption.... I've had the ability to play music on whatever device I can get to play an MP3 since lame v1.0 came out. As such, DRM-encumbered legal 'music' downloads don't interest me.... for most of my devices, DRM-encumbered files are functionally indistinguishable from white noise.
I agree with your sentiments completely. For my most recent purchase, I had the option of iTunes for $10, or used from Amazon for $5 including shipping. I chose the latter, not because it was cheaper, but because I could play it on my devices. If the $10 download had not been iTunes encumbered, I would have bought it that way in order to get the instant gratification digital distribution provides. Anyway, we can be thankful that at least for now, "fair use" law gives one the right to make personal-use copies from cds for the purposes you've described.
Don't misunderstand me -- I don't like DRM either and if given a legal choice, I'll avoid it -- if the DRM is unavoidable, I'll simply avoid the product. But the content owner still has the right to choose the method of distribution and end-users' choices are: 1) to accept the terms with the content, or 2) reject the terms and forgo content.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is that it is the searches which are revealing. It isn't possible to release complete search data AND protect privacy of all users because people search for things that are important to them, i.e., the searches are self revealing. That's why replacing usernames with a numerical identifier was so ineffectual for so many users.
As an aside, I imported the data into a mysql database. I've never messed with that much data before and it was a good learning experience with respect to grep, awk, and sed and converting the tab deliminated files into something I could import into mysql. I do wonder however, if there is a way to just import the tab deliminated file without adding "insert" to lines and escaping the ' ( ) and ; characters that appear in the data. Any experts have a hint? On my athlon 2200+ with 512mb of ram, each search of the data takes about a minute to complete. It's actually faster to just grep for lower numbered userids and then kill grep once the output shows.
You don't have to "get it" to be pedantic bastard about rediculous spelling errors.
I noticed lots of searches for an exact url -- but maybe it is some form of safetynet against making a typo and getting suckered. AOLers are juicy targets, so searching for the url and clicking a link after AOL typochecks wouldn't be a bad idea ... if indeed AOL typochecks.
You realize of course, the context of the "kill the lawyers" quote is that the act of killing all the lawyers would aid in the establishment of a tyrannical reign. In other words, Shakespeare was saying that in some way, there are lawyers who protect freedom.
True, some lawyers work for the RIAA. By the same token, some programmers make spam software. Most lawyers don't work for the RIAA and many work for people's freedoms. Most programmers don't help spammers, and many actively work against spam. I think you should get the point -- it isn't the profession, it's the individual that goes bad. Fact is, by and large it is "people" who are cruel and vindictive.
As someone who has started his own buisiness, and who knows many who have also done so (it's common in my field), let me say this: it's one of the scariest things you can do. I left a cush state gov't job -- a steady check 2x per month, great benefits, retirment etc. etc. I had enough money saved up to support myself for a while OR put a down payment on a house (not both). I chose to start a business -- when you're income drops to zero and your monthly expenses double (office rent etc), you get terrified. Tons of "little guys" run their own business, whether plumbers, landscapers, lawyers, doctors, or dentists -- running a business is open to every educational level.
It annoys me when people who have never actually tried starting a business, get all preachy it (maybe you have and you're destined to be a brilliant innovator). A previous poster was right -- wage slaves don't risk much (and hence stand little to gain). People who try to start their own business often do risk everything. I risked my entire life savings when I could have bought a house instead. My partner mortgaged every last cent out of her home, as did one of my friends. Seriously, take everything you have, everything you can borrow, and then gamble it. Once you do that, evaluate how you feel about this whole issue. Now, I'll certainly listen to my receptionist's suggestions about this or that -- but I'm still making the decisions because I'm the one who has everything at risk. If I go out of business, that's huge for me -- she'll just get a different job answering the phone elsewhere. That's a month's job searching level of inconvenience. I'm out everything. Since I risk more, I have no issue with the idea that I stand to get more.
Subtract two from the "Iraq had WMD" side. I get two results for "There is no evidence that Iraq had WMD."
Maybe a problem, likely not. Mac users tend to go nuts about manufacturing errors more so than others. Anyway, I got a macbook a couple weeks ago -- has the magsafe connector. I recall not too long ago tons of news about the magsafe burning up at the computer side. I noticed that when I pull the connector straight out from the computer, it stresses the joint where the wire and plug meet. Thing about a magnetic connection is that it is hard to pull the two sides straight apart, but easy to break if attacked from an angle. So now I just push on one side of the connector and it breaks away without difficulty or wire stress.
I know everyone always claims to be gentle on their machines, but when I look at other people's laptops -- I suspect the truth is much rougher. Anyway, don't yank the adapter around by its cord and I bet it'll fine.
I realize it's a joke, but still feel like commenting. "Perversions" are like masturbation. Everyone engages to some extent, but is too shy to admit it. I'm hardly surprised that we'd discover AOLers, whatever their technical incapabilities are, have sexual interests.
You're right. Nudity is a pretty good litmus test. I don't think nudist colonies pose an issue however. For example, you could have a bunch of naked people in your living room (we can dream right?) and while amongst the group, there is no expecation that people will not see you're birthday suit, there is still an expectation that people outside the nude group will be excluded. Thus the group has an expectation of privacy. Typically, nudist colonies are secluded in some way so that the nudists as a group, can expect privacy from outsiders, but can't expect others in the group not to see the naughty bits.
Ask yourself this, what would happen to you if you did this to some cop cameras:
This was outside in a place open to view by the public and within earshot of neighbors right? Yes -- it was on his front porch. The cops have no reasonable expectation of privacy when they're in plain site in the public view from a common vid-cam. Neither does anybody. Sure, caveats exist, e.g., upskirt wouldn't fit in "normal". What disturbs me is that people seem so willing to relinquish their rights. Comments such as yours bode poorly for the future -- a future where the state is free to do as it wishes and citizens must always be careful lest some simple harmless act lands them in jail.
Sorry to double post but I just listened to that ringtone. I'm almost 38 and it made me cringe and immediately hit pause -- I'm in a noisy room with a computer that has a tiny single unamplified speaker.
I have an acer LCD and I can hear the inverter or whatever inside makes a whine. Not anywhere as loud as crt though. A long long time ago, I had a crappy job working in a Juvie detention home. The kids hated me because I could hear the TV from the other side of the building -- they'd try to sneak in some tube time in the hours it was supposed to be off.
If you don't have to do anything special to see the thing/act/etc., no expectation of privacy. If you have to do something out of the ordinary, e.g., open a bag or set up a complicated mirror/camera system to see into areas that are normally beyond view (up-skirt), you have a heightened expectation of privacy. When you walk down the street, you expect people to see you. When you walk down the street, you don't expect people to stick their hand in your pocket and start digging around. The division between public and private is actually pretty easy to define.
It's a sure thing.
The best cheat is to charge someone rent on a property that person owns. Even if it's only a $7 payoff, it rocks way more than palming $500 from the bank. The really hard part is not laughing before the next dice roll.
And for stalkers out there, make it easy to establish a victims common route. I can't see how finding a stolen car here and there could possibly outweigh the negative implications of this technology.
"No such thing as a free lunch" has a couple meanings and I think the most commonly meant of these is the second:
1. General: Everything costs money and somebody always pays.
2. Specific: Even if your lunch is free, you will have to pay for it in another way.
With the BBQ, there is some expectation of a quid pro quo -- you invite your buddies over and in a vague sense, probably expect your buddies to invite you over some time and stick a "free" beer in your hand. Now, people don't go around keeping spreadsheets of how many beers their buddies owe them, but we've all probably experienced the friend who becomes a mooch and eventually, the mooch isn't invited to more BBQs. In essence, the mooch got a few free lunches by violating a common social expectation.
Don't be a fruitcake. Given the present administration, if you don't presume they're violating civil liberties to the fullest extent possible shy of tipping over to police state, then you're a fool. Personally, if I heard of something this administration did that was right, I'd think it a hoax. Note: this post is not humor.
Thank you for the good link. I find it unthinkable that an article about such a device would not have a picture.
Awsome investment. At this earnings level, it will only take 166 quarters of revenue to pay for a share. Expenses of course, will stretch that out to much more than that 41 year figure. I just don't understand how people value stocks.
Don't misunderstand me -- I don't like DRM either and if given a legal choice, I'll avoid it -- if the DRM is unavoidable, I'll simply avoid the product. But the content owner still has the right to choose the method of distribution and end-users' choices are: 1) to accept the terms with the content, or 2) reject the terms and forgo content.