Actually, recording someone's IP address isn't illegal and doesn't require a privacy statement (at least not in the USA). If so, every single webserver in the country would need a privacy disclosure statement as ALL webservers record the IP address of their visitors. The only difference here is that this site spews it back at you.
Personally, I think he does an excellent job at translating "Geek Speak" into ordinary lingo that both the judge and the other laypeople involved in the case will be able to easily understand. All in all, I think he also does a good job laying out why the RIAA's case(s) are generally flimsy and why this specific set of suites shouldn't ever see the light of a courtroom.
The only thing I somewhat disagree with him on is his assertion that an IP address, because of its dynamic nature, can't be used as an accurate measure of what internet provider account downloaded a certain file. If the ISP keeps decent records, it most certainly can determine which IP address was allocated to which user at any given time. The time the file was created on the users PC can be cross referenced with what user had that specific IP address at that specific time and it's pretty reliable. What *isn't* reliable though is WHO downloaded the file. Did "John/Jane Doe" themselves download the file or was the file downloaded by someone else via a hacked or unsecure WAP? Did someone visiting the person download the file without their knowledge?
Given the hodgepodge nature of the RIAA's prior suites and how technically flimsy they've been, I think we're very close to seeing judges start throwing these things out as a matter of course. It goes to prove that just because you have the money doesn't mean you always get your way.
This isn't an Internet Explorer bug, it's a Windows one. Using Firefox won't stop you from getting infected. However, using FireFox will mean you will be prompted before the file is run.
Mighty interesting comment: "open source is real software" followed by "grow up and use real software". By your own admissions, we already are! Thank you so much for the validation. I can now continue to live another day.
Just like the USA...
on
Safe Cigarettes?
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
As an American, I am appalled at the very idea of the government spending *any* money on developing a "safer cigarette". While that move might treat the physical effects of smoking and make it a safer alternative than traditional cigarettes, it does nothing to address the fact that smokers are *addicts* with a psychological dependence on a drug.
Why not put money where it's really needed: addiction recovery. Develop drugs that are more effective at helping smokers quit, put more money into social campaigns against smoking (school, television, etc)?
It amazes me sometimes how we Americans will find ways to make bad things acceptable and safer if it makes us money instead of just putting a stop to its use.
Actually, it's *not* "just like Google". It allows you to search binary groups which Google does not carry. Come on now, why not try actually *visiting* the site in question before trashing it and trying (and failing) to be witty about it?
Hopefully this will make customers more comfortable with OSS, that even Microsoft needs outside (out of their control) help to figure out their products.
Why would this make customers more comfortable OSS? If anything, this will strengthen MS's reputation in customers minds because it shows that they are, finally, starting to take the security of their products more seriously. It shows maturation and growth that they can say "Hey, we aren't up to speed on all of the attacks that will be launched against our products but we want to be prepared for when they are launched and we want to discover and fix what will be attacked before it actually is. Teach us".
While I'm definately not a Microsoft fanboy, let's not sink to their level and skew the facts just to try to strengthen our stance. It's disingenious and people see right through it. Give MS credit where credit is due: this is a positive thing from MS.
I wonder if ink jet manufacturers are doing this or will do this soon? Anyone in the know?
Re:But can it do grouped CONVERSATIONS like gmail?
on
Open Source AJAX Webmail
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Gmail has everyone beaten with its conversation grouping feature.
I've never understood what the big deal is about conversation grouping was and why other mail clients found it so difficult to implement. Conversation grouping is one of the easiest things to implement and it should be considered a bare minimum for mail clients. We're talking a few hundred lines of code at most to implement the feature. Why is it so hard? Yahoo? Hotmail? Yep, I'm talking to you.
If you purchase your CD's from a pawn shop or used music shop you can usually get pretty recent music and the record companies don't get a penny of it.
It continually amazes me when I read Slashdot stories like this and everyone acts as though tapping internet communication is some new invastion of your personal privacy. Consider this:
1: Law enforcement have, for years, been able to secretly tap your telephone conversations without ever telling you or the people calling you that the line was indeed tapped.
2: Law enforcement have, for years, been able to install keyloggers and other spyware onto suspects computers without notifying them that they were doing so. Several crime bosses were taken down this way.
3: Law enforcement have, for years, used electronic communication and records of such communications, in courts to prosecute criminals.
Now, further, consider this:
1: With these laws in place how likely are they to be used against any given innocent civillian?
2: With these laws in place how likely is "malicious prosecution" to be used against any given innocent civillian.
3: Why would the government, law enforcement, aliens, whatever, have ANY interest in what you're doing on the internet? Much less enough interest to bother to tap your internet communications.
Many things can be abused by "The Man" but you need to consider how likely it is to affect any one given person. And, what would they do with it if they DID violate your privacy? If you were doing nothing wrong then they really couldn't use the information in any way without admitting that they had originally misused the system to begin with thus starting a firestorm. It's like someone taking nude pictures of you while you dress after they've broken into your home and hidden in a closet. What blackmail power do they have? Sure, they could go public with the photos but you could go to the police and have them put in jail. The payoff of doing such a thing for them isn't worth the cost that could be associated with it.
So the government taps your phone and finds out you like to masturbate using mom's panties and bra. Could be embarrassing to you. But do you REALLY think they're that hell bent on embarrassing YOU that they will risk all hell coming down on them by disclosing the information?
Actually, Mozilla has all the things you mentioned above. Notice that this virus *did not* come from a download on the official Mozilla site. it came from downloading the software from unaffilliated sites. This is absolutely no different than someone downloading a copy of MS Office from Limewire and then blaming Microsoft because they got a virus. There are benefits to using the official downloads site people.
Simply because saying "Its because of God," leads us to a dead end
As a Christian, I can see both sides of the debate. I think we need to accept that things are the way they are "because it was God". I think that is what faith is. But I also believe that God, who created the laws of physics and quantum mechanics, would operate fully within those laws during his creation of the universe and things in it.
That said, I think that Christians can investigate the creation scientifically. We already know the WHO of the creation. But nothing is stopping us from finding out the HOW and WHY.
I've done something like this for a government entity with about 1.7 million accounts with similar constraints. Email me at anthony@adctech.biz or papillion@gmail.com or call me at (918) 926-0139. I can recommend, setup, do reports, etc for them for a reasonable price.
Some countries dont like to be divided, and would rather all speak with one voice with national unity.
I agree with you. But I don't think that's what's happening in China. The people haven't decided to speak with one voice in unity or with a nationalist spirit. The government has mandated that they do so and that is where we run into problems. In addition to that, should the people of China decide to speak with one voice it would still be a government controlled voice since they would be basing their speech on what they see, hear, and experience through the media - which is controlled by the government.
I've always been of the opinion that American technology providers need to provide unlogged services within China. That way, if the government comes asking for records, there are none to give. Yes, I also realize that China may mandate that they log and that is the time to just pull out of the market. Some things are more important than money. Morals and ethics for example. So I don't buy Yahoo's statement about "we just can't ignore the market". Sure you can. You just...well...ignore it. Yahoo was a huge company before they entered China and would continue to be successful if they ignored the market completely. In fact, they might actually gain some customers because they are taking a stand against an oppressive government.
So, while I agree with your statement I also can see where Yahoo needs to get a backbone.
I have to say that I sat in #interdictor-tech for nearly 30 minutes and asked numerous times about HOW to setup a mirror of the video feed and NOT A SINGLE PERSON even bothered to responded. All I needed was a place to go grab the feed from. Guess they don't need it that bad.
Everytime a new technology hits the streets or gains a large audiance there are always those who hail it as "the next big thing" like this article is doing with AJAX. Usually, it's a giant pop then a slow fizzle back into the toolbox.
AJAX is great. But it's not like it's a reinvention of the WWW or the Internet or something like that.
That isn't *always* the case. When I got mine the time from walking in off the street to getting "approved" was about 8 months. 9/11 might have added quite a bit of time to that though.
Anthony
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, recording someone's IP address isn't illegal and doesn't require a privacy statement (at least not in the USA). If so, every single webserver in the country would need a privacy disclosure statement as ALL webservers record the IP address of their visitors. The only difference here is that this site spews it back at you.
The only thing I somewhat disagree with him on is his assertion that an IP address, because of its dynamic nature, can't be used as an accurate measure of what internet provider account downloaded a certain file. If the ISP keeps decent records, it most certainly can determine which IP address was allocated to which user at any given time. The time the file was created on the users PC can be cross referenced with what user had that specific IP address at that specific time and it's pretty reliable. What *isn't* reliable though is WHO downloaded the file. Did "John/Jane Doe" themselves download the file or was the file downloaded by someone else via a hacked or unsecure WAP? Did someone visiting the person download the file without their knowledge?
Given the hodgepodge nature of the RIAA's prior suites and how technically flimsy they've been, I think we're very close to seeing judges start throwing these things out as a matter of course. It goes to prove that just because you have the money doesn't mean you always get your way.
This isn't an Internet Explorer bug, it's a Windows one. Using Firefox won't stop you from getting infected. However, using FireFox will mean you will be prompted before the file is run.
nt
Mighty interesting comment: "open source is real software" followed by "grow up and use real software". By your own admissions, we already are! Thank you so much for the validation. I can now continue to live another day.
As an American, I am appalled at the very idea of the government spending *any* money on developing a "safer cigarette". While that move might treat the physical effects of smoking and make it a safer alternative than traditional cigarettes, it does nothing to address the fact that smokers are *addicts* with a psychological dependence on a drug. Why not put money where it's really needed: addiction recovery. Develop drugs that are more effective at helping smokers quit, put more money into social campaigns against smoking (school, television, etc)? It amazes me sometimes how we Americans will find ways to make bad things acceptable and safer if it makes us money instead of just putting a stop to its use.
Actually, it's *not* "just like Google". It allows you to search binary groups which Google does not carry. Come on now, why not try actually *visiting* the site in question before trashing it and trying (and failing) to be witty about it?
Obviously, someone didn't Google "satire" before posting did they?
Why would this make customers more comfortable OSS? If anything, this will strengthen MS's reputation in customers minds because it shows that they are, finally, starting to take the security of their products more seriously. It shows maturation and growth that they can say "Hey, we aren't up to speed on all of the attacks that will be launched against our products but we want to be prepared for when they are launched and we want to discover and fix what will be attacked before it actually is. Teach us".
While I'm definately not a Microsoft fanboy, let's not sink to their level and skew the facts just to try to strengthen our stance. It's disingenious and people see right through it. Give MS credit where credit is due: this is a positive thing from MS.
I wonder if ink jet manufacturers are doing this or will do this soon? Anyone in the know?
I've never understood what the big deal is about conversation grouping was and why other mail clients found it so difficult to implement. Conversation grouping is one of the easiest things to implement and it should be considered a bare minimum for mail clients. We're talking a few hundred lines of code at most to implement the feature. Why is it so hard? Yahoo? Hotmail? Yep, I'm talking to you.
If you purchase your CD's from a pawn shop or used music shop you can usually get pretty recent music and the record companies don't get a penny of it.
It has. It's called OpenLaszlo and it's pretty cool.
1: Law enforcement have, for years, been able to secretly tap your telephone conversations without ever telling you or the people calling you that the line was indeed tapped.
2: Law enforcement have, for years, been able to install keyloggers and other spyware onto suspects computers without notifying them that they were doing so. Several crime bosses were taken down this way.
3: Law enforcement have, for years, used electronic communication and records of such communications, in courts to prosecute criminals.
Now, further, consider this:
1: With these laws in place how likely are they to be used against any given innocent civillian?
2: With these laws in place how likely is "malicious prosecution" to be used against any given innocent civillian.
3: Why would the government, law enforcement, aliens, whatever, have ANY interest in what you're doing on the internet? Much less enough interest to bother to tap your internet communications.
Many things can be abused by "The Man" but you need to consider how likely it is to affect any one given person. And, what would they do with it if they DID violate your privacy? If you were doing nothing wrong then they really couldn't use the information in any way without admitting that they had originally misused the system to begin with thus starting a firestorm. It's like someone taking nude pictures of you while you dress after they've broken into your home and hidden in a closet. What blackmail power do they have? Sure, they could go public with the photos but you could go to the police and have them put in jail. The payoff of doing such a thing for them isn't worth the cost that could be associated with it.
So the government taps your phone and finds out you like to masturbate using mom's panties and bra. Could be embarrassing to you. But do you REALLY think they're that hell bent on embarrassing YOU that they will risk all hell coming down on them by disclosing the information?
Does anyone know of any AJAX toolkits targeted towards PHP developers? I am currently working on a project that could definately gain a lot from AJAX.
Actually, Mozilla has all the things you mentioned above. Notice that this virus *did not* come from a download on the official Mozilla site. it came from downloading the software from unaffilliated sites. This is absolutely no different than someone downloading a copy of MS Office from Limewire and then blaming Microsoft because they got a virus. There are benefits to using the official downloads site people.
As a Christian, I can see both sides of the debate. I think we need to accept that things are the way they are "because it was God". I think that is what faith is. But I also believe that God, who created the laws of physics and quantum mechanics, would operate fully within those laws during his creation of the universe and things in it.
That said, I think that Christians can investigate the creation scientifically. We already know the WHO of the creation. But nothing is stopping us from finding out the HOW and WHY.
I've done something like this for a government entity with about 1.7 million accounts with similar constraints. Email me at anthony@adctech.biz or papillion@gmail.com or call me at (918) 926-0139. I can recommend, setup, do reports, etc for them for a reasonable price.
I agree with you. But I don't think that's what's happening in China. The people haven't decided to speak with one voice in unity or with a nationalist spirit. The government has mandated that they do so and that is where we run into problems. In addition to that, should the people of China decide to speak with one voice it would still be a government controlled voice since they would be basing their speech on what they see, hear, and experience through the media - which is controlled by the government.
I've always been of the opinion that American technology providers need to provide unlogged services within China. That way, if the government comes asking for records, there are none to give. Yes, I also realize that China may mandate that they log and that is the time to just pull out of the market. Some things are more important than money. Morals and ethics for example. So I don't buy Yahoo's statement about "we just can't ignore the market". Sure you can. You just...well...ignore it. Yahoo was a huge company before they entered China and would continue to be successful if they ignored the market completely. In fact, they might actually gain some customers because they are taking a stand against an oppressive government.
So, while I agree with your statement I also can see where Yahoo needs to get a backbone.
I have to say that I sat in #interdictor-tech for nearly 30 minutes and asked numerous times about HOW to setup a mirror of the video feed and NOT A SINGLE PERSON even bothered to responded. All I needed was a place to go grab the feed from. Guess they don't need it that bad.
AJAX is great. But it's not like it's a reinvention of the WWW or the Internet or something like that.
Wouldn't that be GNUdle?
So when can we expect your new search service to be launched? I can't wait to have a more efficient way to search and organize information!!
That isn't *always* the case. When I got mine the time from walking in off the street to getting "approved" was about 8 months. 9/11 might have added quite a bit of time to that though. Anthony
Contact me at papillion at gmail dot com and I can definately help you out.