Being a PGP & Crypto zealot in the early 90's, I expected that more apps today would embed security (e.g. seamless encrypting of email, like Ordo in Cryptonomicon). Hushmail has come close, but theirs is only seamless with other hushmail users, AFAIK.
I would also liked to have seen more OS/hardware-level encryption of physical disks.
OK, but the slander is funded by Microsoft. After RedHat wins the lawsuit, what is to keep Gates & Co. from bribing another failing company to be their smear muscle?
Actually, the problem is sociological, wherein Edwards' Law comes into play:
You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem." - Edwards' Law.
Didn't read the title at all, since my view (possibly all views?) of the discussion thread displays the messages in line. In fact, didn't even know what your subject line was until I read your message.
Of course, if you posted this while logged in, I would've mod'ed you down for being off-topic;)
This is still about fighting "terrorists"
on
DOD vs. 802.11b
·
· Score: 1
...even those in the US.
Clearly, the US Military, who does not directly control the policy decisions of foreign countries, would not employ a technology that it knows is defeatable by consumer devices commonly found overseas.
I think this may be about exercising greater control over Wireless APs, which have been designated a "terrorist threat" when allowed to be public access.
Slashdot Mirror
Being a PGP & Crypto zealot in the early 90's, I expected that more apps today would embed security (e.g. seamless encrypting of email, like Ordo in Cryptonomicon). Hushmail has come close, but theirs is only seamless with other hushmail users, AFAIK.
I would also liked to have seen more OS/hardware-level encryption of physical disks.
Comments anyone?
OK, but the slander is funded by Microsoft. After RedHat wins the lawsuit, what is to keep Gates & Co. from bribing another failing company to be their smear muscle?
Actually, the problem is sociological, wherein Edwards' Law comes into play: You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem." - Edwards' Law.
Didn't read the title at all, since my view (possibly all views?) of the discussion thread displays the messages in line. In fact, didn't even know what your subject line was until I read your message. Of course, if you posted this while logged in, I would've mod'ed you down for being off-topic ;)
...play NetHack!
...even those in the US. Clearly, the US Military, who does not directly control the policy decisions of foreign countries, would not employ a technology that it knows is defeatable by consumer devices commonly found overseas. I think this may be about exercising greater control over Wireless APs, which have been designated a "terrorist threat" when allowed to be public access.