In undergrad classes, research is commonly assigned by the professors. In postgrad classes, students are often required to come up with a research topic of their own. To make matters worse, it has to be something new. So, consider a sociology student working towards a PhD. What area of sociology hasn't been researched over and over and over? How about job satisfaction!
I am not attempting to claim that some areas of study are worse than others because they aren't always on the breaking edge of new research. I'm also not attempting to claim that postgrads shouldn't be pushed to perform new research. I am only stating that in some fields, students just don't have much to choose from. So, they end up doing what we would call worthless research. In reality, it isn't worthless. It is specifically designed to get them a degree so they can (hopefully) make a lot more money.
Who is this Winn Schwartau guy and what company is he talking about. He says he is in "security", so we better take his word for it when he says Windows is insecure and Mac isn't. His reasons (for those who don't want to RTFA). (my comments are inline)
Windows is complex (and Mac is as simple as my old TI-99 4/A?)
New package releases have tons of changes to functionality (yes, with SP2 you suddenly had to use the mouse on the left side of the keyboard or it wouldn't point correctly!)
WinTel machines use different versions of BIOS (Hmmm... I never realized that Windows absorbed and used my BIOS. That must be why I suck at Doom 3 - I need a better BIOS)
Some Windows programs take shortcuts (and there are no poorly written Mac programs - none at all. IE5 on Mac displays the web it was meant to be. All other web browsers are broken.)
Hardware - there is competition in the motherboard market (and we Mac fans despise competition. All motherboards must be assimilated. Resistance is futile!)
RAM - cheap RAM is, well, cheap (especially when you buy it from that guy under the Interstate overpass. I used to be up to 4 sticks a day - that is until the intervention...)
Hard drisks - cheap drives are, well, cheap (I'm glad I had the intervention before I got into the hard stuff. Don't let anyone fool you. RAM is just a gateway device. Mess with cheap RAM and you'll be spinning up the cheap Hard Drives before you know it.)
Damn... I forgot to turn on sarcasm mode so the overly serious/. idiots would know this is all just a joke...
I thought Section 215 allowed them to pretty much do that (demand library records) with very little justification or oversight.
Oh, you mean Section 215 - the section which allows the Director of the FBI to demand records without any oversight except the House and Senate Intelligence and Judiciary Committees? Yes. Isn't it funny how the ACLU keeps their analysis of the USA PATRIOT Act vague enough to make it seem that anyone can get any information without any oversight at all.
Patriot-Act could let law enforcement use this database of numerical "fingerprints".
Read the USA PATRIOT Act before stating what it can and cannot do. The USA PATRIOT Act's provisions for public/small business records access comes from the USA Act, which comes from FISA (passed in 1978). In order to access those records, an investigator has to go to FISC and convince a panel of judges that you are suspected of espionage, terrorism, or drug smuggling AND you have not committed a crime that would allow for a search warrant AND letting you know that they want to search those records would allow you to delete data that they want to see. Finally, when they look at it, they have a time limit, set by the FISC, for letting you know what they looked for and what they found.
That doesn't sound much to me like the USA PATRIOT Act lets law enforcement just wander into a library and dump all the data they have.
I'm missing your point completely. Your scenario is that I can decide to be a hacker. I hack into the FBI and get a list of everyone's fingerprint. I then hack into the library and get all the fingerprint hashes. I compare fingerprints to fingerprint hashes and I figure out who you are. And then...?
Wouldn't it have been a hell of a lot easier to just grab your name and address off the library's server when I was hacking that? Why mess with all the fingerprint junk?
As for concerns about 'hash security', isn't that what john-the-ripper is used for? Just because you can brute-force a password algorithm doesn't make it insecure. From the data provided, this is the equivalent of a 15-character password hash. The best password crackers can take months to crack 10-character password hashes. Then, even if they do figure out that a certain sequence of fingerprint identities matches up a specific hash - what? They somehow clone a finger and alter the dna to create your fingerprint so they can use the computer at the library?
What is the whole point!? I simply don't get it. This is *NOT* a case of the library storing fingerprints. This is a case of the library using fingerprints for a second or so to create a unique ID that cannot be converted back into a fingerprint.
But it's still shockingly cavalier to describe the technology as "just a bar code".
As he states - it is a one-way algorithm. If I have your barcode off your library card, I cannot reconstruct your name, SSN, birthdate, and all that without going into the library's database. With the number-sequence that this system creates, I cannot reconstruct your fingerprint at all. I cannot reconstruct any of the data previously mentioned without going into the database. So, instead of creating a random number with the unix timestamp as a seed, they are creating a random number with your fingerprint as a seed. What is so shocking about that?
I have difficulty understanding why this seems like a good idea to anyone
Hmmm... I guess someone needs to go to your library, tell them that they are you - they can even print a fake barcode on any old library card since barcode techology is open and freely available to anyone and everyone. Then, they can surf for child porn on your account. When the feds come to your door, you can explain to them that it is a terrible idea for the library to go to every measure to ensure that patrons are who they say they are.
I have difficulty understanding why this gentleman seems incapable of understanding people's worries about a fucking library requiring fingerprints!
There is a difference between requiring fingerprints on record (actually having your fingerprint in a database somewhere) and using your fingerprint to create a random sequence of numbers. If you cannot see that, then you are forcing yourself to be blind to it.
I'm sure someone already saw this and posted it, but I just noticed it...
4. PRIVACY.
(a) AUTOMATIC FEEDBACK. You agree that the Browser may periodically check your computer system for, and report back, without additional notice to you, information relating to your use of the Browser, including, for example, information relating to the frequency of your use of the Browser, your Browser configuration settings, and information on computer errors, malfunctions or other abnormalities occurring during your use of the Browser. The Netscape Browser team may use the information for such purposes as diagnosing performance issues with the Browser, improving the reliability of the download and install process, and improving its products and services to users generally. This information will not be tied to any information that would identify you personally.
(b) BROWSER ID. The Browser contains a specific identification number for the purpose of tracking the number of unique instances of the Browser in use. This number is not associated with any information about you, or that would personally identify you.
I don't know how you would go about getting some one else's kid's birth certificate.
In most states, you mail a check for a handling/copy/shipping fee to the appropriate state department (usually state records). Some states require a signature for the request - but not the signature of the person on the certificate, just the signature of the requester.
This usually leads to the question of why it is so hard for adopted kids to find their parents. I am adopted. My birth certificate has my adopted parents on it, not my birth parents. I checked in Missouri, Kansas, Oklahoma, California, and South Carolina. In all of those states, changing an adopted child's birth certificate to contain blanks for the parents or the adopted parents is the norm. I assume it is the same for most states.
There is a lot of public data about everyone. Basically, any transaction you do with a government office or agency is public data. If someone views that public data, how are they invading your privacy?
I did take an interest in the Mini-ITX boards, but I don't have the time to hunt and pick through the internet to learn about it. I want to buy a PC. It is just too hard to get a motherboard, CPU, and memory and be guaranteed that it will all work together. When I search, everything is very vague about what you get. When it says 512MB RAM, does it mean you get 512MB RAM or does it mean the motherboard supports 512MB RAM? As I said, I just don't have the time to research and find out what works with what before hunting around for parts.
I want a low power/low heat computer because I want to be able to leave it on all the time. Every PC I've had has been both a computer and a space heater. It is hot enough. I want a computer without the space heater. It isn't that I care so much about global warming. I care about the warming in my own house and all the wasted electricity I have to pay for (both in the PC and my extra AC use). The problem is that it is hard to find a low heat PC. I would like to take the motherboard I have out of the case and drop in a low-heat one. But, all I can find are extremely overpriced complete systems with the obligatory Windows pre-install.
While this sounds plausible on the surface, what is the real use? Take the scenario at face value. He's camping in the woods somewhere. The pager goes off in the night. Let's say that he hosting an ecommerce site and the database keeps going down so products aren't showing up on the site. So, he packs up (an hour or so), drives back to Seattle (another 2-3 hours), and then rushes in wired on drive-thru coffee to fix the problem before anyone knows about it. Am I missing something?
Before you start with the whole "He can tell his IT people to fix the problem," remember that he said he is the only IT person in the company. What's he going to do, call his accountant and talk her through viewing the logs and using vi to edit the config files or something?
Wait! Maybe he plans to mind-meld with the sat-pager and surf the virtual net back to the server and fight the bugs like in Tron! This guy is cooler than I first thought. I'm in awe.
FTA: So far no formal charges have been filed against Mr Kuvayev and his colleagues who are thought to be behind the two companies, 2K Services Ltd and Ecash Pay Ltd, that sent all the spam.
So, what did they do? They filed a restraining order to have the websites shut down. A RESTRAINING ORDER AGAINST A WEBSITE!?!?!?
FTA: Two phone numbers for Kuvayev and 2K Services in Canada were disconnected
So, he disconnected his phones and moved. How long until he sets up shop again?
Sorry. I was discussing this just minutes before this story popped up on/. - so I didn't think to go into detail.
A very brief history of the USA PATRIOT Act:
1) Cold war starts.
2) Feds go nuts with anti-spy stuff.
3) In 1978, FISA was passed to lay out the law on investigating spies, terrorists, and the like. The catch - you are trying to bust them BEFORE they commit acts of espionage or terrorism, so you must investigate them without warrants, which are only issued in the investigation of a crime.
4) FISC is formed to oversee FISA.
5) Fast-forward to 2001. WTC attack.
6) Why didn't we see it coming? FISA described terrorism as being supported by a foreign power (meaning a country). Al Queda isn't a country.
7) The USA Act is passed to allow for investigation of terrorists without the backing of a foreign power.
8) Another act (I forget the name) is passed to allow the feds to secure money from international terrorist accounts.
9) Too many congressional acts running around, so FISA, the USA Act, and the money-securing one are all tied up with a pretty bow and called the USA PATRIOT Act.
10) The media pretends this is completely new and runs story after story about abuses of the Patriot Act.
That is a starting point for understanding the mess. I *strongly* suggest reading more on the Congress' website.
See and therein lies the rub. #4 and #5 are not clearly defined, leading to gross abuse of the provisions.
I do not disagree in any way with that. I disagree with those that make statements like, "The Patriot Act allows government to spy on you whenever they like." I work the county. That is government. So, I can spy on anyone I want anytime I like? No. That is why I ask for the debate to be about the real issues. Who decides who is on the FISC? What criteria is needed for the FISC to allow invocation of the FISA/PATRIOT Act? Once invocated, what is required to stop it. Are you open for investigation forever once it starts? There are a lot of things I have a problem with, but that is all below my problem with people claiming that the Patriot Act allows anyone in government to spy on me whenever they like without any valid reason.
Thought that was the whole point of the patriot act - they don't need 'evidence'.
No. That's the whole point of the alarmist's misinterpretation of the USA PATRIOT Act. The actual act is easy to understand. I'm saying that I agree with this system in any way. I'm only stating what I understand by reading through the FISA, USA Act, and USA PATRIOT Act.
1) We think we have a spy/terrorist. Investigate him.
2) We need a warrant.
3) Well, he hasn't comitted a crime yet.
4) Do we have evidence that he may be a spy/terrorist?
5) Yes, but no evidence of a crime.
6) Well then, take it to the Foreign Intelligence Security Court and get them to allow us to do the investigation under FISA/PATRIOT Act.
Pay close attention to number 5. It is not: We have nothing but a hunch, skip the rest of the procedure and do whatever you want. That is what the alarmists want you to think. So, the method they have used is flooding the press, radio, blogs, and anything they can find with misinformation.
The freedoms we curtail, and the unchecked empowerment we grant our government
Unfortunately, the citizens of the United States are not ready to tackle this issue. We still live in a media-controlled mindset of "Praise the President" or "Blame the President". Douglas Adams was joking, but he was more true than I'm certain he would have liked to been when he stated that the primary function of the President is not to weild power, but distract attention away from those who are truly in power.
The President does not make laws. He is merely the last signature on the law. Congress makes the laws. Congress rewrites (I'm sorry, 'amends') the Constitution. Congress decides who gets all your taxes and who doesn't. Congress has even taken away the powers of the President by requiring all Presidential powers to be controlled by Congressional vote. We say that the President appoints cabinets positions and judges, but Congress just has to sit back and say 'no' until the President appoints the guy that they like.
Until the general public sees past the President, past the curtain to the true power in government, we will continue to bicker about pointless things and getting into arguments about what the President did or didn't do, when it is truly what Congress did or didn't do.
Now they can invoke PATRIOT when they start scanning your ID's RFID tag without your consent.
Are you calling me a spy or terrorist? You specifically stated that they (I assume you mean federal investigators as they are the only ones who can invoke the FISA, which I assume you mean when you say PATRIOT) will be scanning *my* ID. The FISC has to allow any invocation of the FISA - commonly misrepresented as invocation of the PATRIOT Act. They are only allowed to authorize it in specific investigations, primarily investigations of spies and terrorists. So, you are claiming that the FISC has reason to believe that I am a spy or terrorist. Well, that pisses me the hell off that some stranger that I've never met would have that opinion of me. I hope you are top on the FISC's list.
I guess Republicans must be looking beyond Bush now, and thinking about how they're going to justify the post-911 decisions they made.
Wow. I never realized that the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives were completely Republican in 2001. They must have a huge cover-up going on right now because the Congress' website lists a hell of a lot of Democrats as serving in 2001 and voting 'yea' on the USA Act and the USA PATRIOT Act.
The USA PATRIOT Act is merely the USA Act and a money-capturing act. The USA Act is a slight upgrade to the FISA. It does not eliminate the FISA. The USA PATRIOT Act does not eliminate the USA Act. So, when parts of the USA PATRIOT Act expire, do they retroactively expire in the USA Act and then on the FISA? The article doesn't mention any of this at all. It just reinforces the common myth that the USA PATRIOT Act is an original set of provisions instead of the easy to discover fact (visit the Congress' website) that it is a conglomeration of provisions that have been around since 1978.
Additionally, what "ID Number" will be required on the license?
It merely states that there must be an ID number. In other words, there must be some unique feature of the identification card that allows them to track it back to the owner of the card. If they didn't require this, two guys with the same name could easily be confused. Hey, we'd never confuse Al-Libbi with Al-Libbey.
Finally, the machine readable technology is set by DHS and can change at their whim.
Keep in mind that it requires a common machine readable technology. Most people are ignoring the work common and assuming that the government will require all IDs to have some expensive crystal matrix technology embedded into them. Think common: Barcodes and Mag Strips are the only common machine readable technologies that I know of. Who says they can't allow one, the other, or both?
No sane congressperson would dare to vote against the troop funding omnibus because all of his peers would immediately label him an enemy of the troops.
Sane congresspeople vote against military and defense spending all the time. They vote to close military bases all the time - putting hundreds of people out of work. There is nothing at all magical about 'troops' or 'military'. It is simply an issue where people focus heavily on the times when military spending is accepted and ignore the times when it is denied.
This is a reply to a topic of peer pressure. Peer pressure is used to invoke inflamtory concepts, such as the Reds are invading Hollywood and we must blacklist all the dang Communists! Peer pressure tells you that you must believe the inflamatory concept at face value. Do not do research. Do not go to the US Congress' website. Do not look up military bills that have been voted on. Do not look at the voting history on those bills. Do not get the facts. Just believe what you are told - oh, and tell it to everyone else. If enough people say it, it must be true.
FTA: "Practically speaking, your driver's license likely will have to be reissued to meet federal standards."
What standards doesn't my driver's license have? Again, FTA: At a minimum: name, birth date, sex, ID number, a digital photograph, address, and a "common machine-readable technology" that Homeland Security will decide on.
Checking my driver's license:
[x] Name
[x] Birth Date
[x] Sex
[x] ID Number
[x] Digital Photograph
[x] Address
[x] Machine-readable technology: both a magstrip and a barcode.
What states are issuing driver's licenses without this information on them?
I didn't have anything to do with the design of this, but I have to assume that two cameras are necessary because you'd have to tilt the camera otherwise. Normally, a satcam is pointed straight down. If you get two images a few meters apart, you can't derive much z-axis data from them. With the cameras tilted so that they converge at the approximate height of the sat, you can derive z-axis information and work out the height of items on the ground.
Of course, you don't *need* two cameras. As I said, you could tilt the camera and take a snapshot of one spot from two angles. A much neater thing to do (in my opinion), would be to put a tilted camera on the outside of spinning ring. Then, try to keep the sat in one position as you take a 360 degree spin around something of interest on the ground. I bet 2 cameras is much cheaper though.
Slashdot Mirror
In undergrad classes, research is commonly assigned by the professors. In postgrad classes, students are often required to come up with a research topic of their own. To make matters worse, it has to be something new. So, consider a sociology student working towards a PhD. What area of sociology hasn't been researched over and over and over? How about job satisfaction!
I am not attempting to claim that some areas of study are worse than others because they aren't always on the breaking edge of new research. I'm also not attempting to claim that postgrads shouldn't be pushed to perform new research. I am only stating that in some fields, students just don't have much to choose from. So, they end up doing what we would call worthless research. In reality, it isn't worthless. It is specifically designed to get them a degree so they can (hopefully) make a lot more money.
Damn... I forgot to turn on sarcasm mode so the overly serious
I thought Section 215 allowed them to pretty much do that (demand library records) with very little justification or oversight.
Oh, you mean Section 215 - the section which allows the Director of the FBI to demand records without any oversight except the House and Senate Intelligence and Judiciary Committees? Yes. Isn't it funny how the ACLU keeps their analysis of the USA PATRIOT Act vague enough to make it seem that anyone can get any information without any oversight at all.
Patriot-Act could let law enforcement use this database of numerical "fingerprints".
Read the USA PATRIOT Act before stating what it can and cannot do. The USA PATRIOT Act's provisions for public/small business records access comes from the USA Act, which comes from FISA (passed in 1978). In order to access those records, an investigator has to go to FISC and convince a panel of judges that you are suspected of espionage, terrorism, or drug smuggling AND you have not committed a crime that would allow for a search warrant AND letting you know that they want to search those records would allow you to delete data that they want to see. Finally, when they look at it, they have a time limit, set by the FISC, for letting you know what they looked for and what they found.
That doesn't sound much to me like the USA PATRIOT Act lets law enforcement just wander into a library and dump all the data they have.
I'm missing your point completely. Your scenario is that I can decide to be a hacker. I hack into the FBI and get a list of everyone's fingerprint. I then hack into the library and get all the fingerprint hashes. I compare fingerprints to fingerprint hashes and I figure out who you are. And then...?
Wouldn't it have been a hell of a lot easier to just grab your name and address off the library's server when I was hacking that? Why mess with all the fingerprint junk?
As for concerns about 'hash security', isn't that what john-the-ripper is used for? Just because you can brute-force a password algorithm doesn't make it insecure. From the data provided, this is the equivalent of a 15-character password hash. The best password crackers can take months to crack 10-character password hashes. Then, even if they do figure out that a certain sequence of fingerprint identities matches up a specific hash - what? They somehow clone a finger and alter the dna to create your fingerprint so they can use the computer at the library?
What is the whole point!? I simply don't get it. This is *NOT* a case of the library storing fingerprints. This is a case of the library using fingerprints for a second or so to create a unique ID that cannot be converted back into a fingerprint.
But it's still shockingly cavalier to describe the technology as "just a bar code".
As he states - it is a one-way algorithm. If I have your barcode off your library card, I cannot reconstruct your name, SSN, birthdate, and all that without going into the library's database. With the number-sequence that this system creates, I cannot reconstruct your fingerprint at all. I cannot reconstruct any of the data previously mentioned without going into the database. So, instead of creating a random number with the unix timestamp as a seed, they are creating a random number with your fingerprint as a seed. What is so shocking about that?
I have difficulty understanding why this seems like a good idea to anyone
Hmmm... I guess someone needs to go to your library, tell them that they are you - they can even print a fake barcode on any old library card since barcode techology is open and freely available to anyone and everyone. Then, they can surf for child porn on your account. When the feds come to your door, you can explain to them that it is a terrible idea for the library to go to every measure to ensure that patrons are who they say they are.
I have difficulty understanding why this gentleman seems incapable of understanding people's worries about a fucking library requiring fingerprints!
There is a difference between requiring fingerprints on record (actually having your fingerprint in a database somewhere) and using your fingerprint to create a random sequence of numbers. If you cannot see that, then you are forcing yourself to be blind to it.
You can't polish a turd.
That's not what they say. That is what people who weren't listening say. The phrase is: You can polish a turd all you want, but it is still a turd.
I don't know how you would go about getting some one else's kid's birth certificate.
In most states, you mail a check for a handling/copy/shipping fee to the appropriate state department (usually state records). Some states require a signature for the request - but not the signature of the person on the certificate, just the signature of the requester.
This usually leads to the question of why it is so hard for adopted kids to find their parents. I am adopted. My birth certificate has my adopted parents on it, not my birth parents. I checked in Missouri, Kansas, Oklahoma, California, and South Carolina. In all of those states, changing an adopted child's birth certificate to contain blanks for the parents or the adopted parents is the norm. I assume it is the same for most states.
There is a lot of public data about everyone. Basically, any transaction you do with a government office or agency is public data. If someone views that public data, how are they invading your privacy?
I did take an interest in the Mini-ITX boards, but I don't have the time to hunt and pick through the internet to learn about it. I want to buy a PC. It is just too hard to get a motherboard, CPU, and memory and be guaranteed that it will all work together. When I search, everything is very vague about what you get. When it says 512MB RAM, does it mean you get 512MB RAM or does it mean the motherboard supports 512MB RAM? As I said, I just don't have the time to research and find out what works with what before hunting around for parts.
I want a low power/low heat computer because I want to be able to leave it on all the time. Every PC I've had has been both a computer and a space heater. It is hot enough. I want a computer without the space heater. It isn't that I care so much about global warming. I care about the warming in my own house and all the wasted electricity I have to pay for (both in the PC and my extra AC use). The problem is that it is hard to find a low heat PC. I would like to take the motherboard I have out of the case and drop in a low-heat one. But, all I can find are extremely overpriced complete systems with the obligatory Windows pre-install.
While this sounds plausible on the surface, what is the real use? Take the scenario at face value. He's camping in the woods somewhere. The pager goes off in the night. Let's say that he hosting an ecommerce site and the database keeps going down so products aren't showing up on the site. So, he packs up (an hour or so), drives back to Seattle (another 2-3 hours), and then rushes in wired on drive-thru coffee to fix the problem before anyone knows about it. Am I missing something?
Before you start with the whole "He can tell his IT people to fix the problem," remember that he said he is the only IT person in the company. What's he going to do, call his accountant and talk her through viewing the logs and using vi to edit the config files or something?
Wait! Maybe he plans to mind-meld with the sat-pager and surf the virtual net back to the server and fight the bugs like in Tron! This guy is cooler than I first thought. I'm in awe.
FTA: So far no formal charges have been filed against Mr Kuvayev and his colleagues who are thought to be behind the two companies, 2K Services Ltd and Ecash Pay Ltd, that sent all the spam.
So, what did they do? They filed a restraining order to have the websites shut down. A RESTRAINING ORDER AGAINST A WEBSITE!?!?!?
FTA: Two phone numbers for Kuvayev and 2K Services in Canada were disconnected
So, he disconnected his phones and moved. How long until he sets up shop again?
Do you want to mention WTF "FISA" is?
/. - so I didn't think to go into detail.
Sorry. I was discussing this just minutes before this story popped up on
A very brief history of the USA PATRIOT Act:
1) Cold war starts.
2) Feds go nuts with anti-spy stuff.
3) In 1978, FISA was passed to lay out the law on investigating spies, terrorists, and the like. The catch - you are trying to bust them BEFORE they commit acts of espionage or terrorism, so you must investigate them without warrants, which are only issued in the investigation of a crime.
4) FISC is formed to oversee FISA.
5) Fast-forward to 2001. WTC attack.
6) Why didn't we see it coming? FISA described terrorism as being supported by a foreign power (meaning a country). Al Queda isn't a country.
7) The USA Act is passed to allow for investigation of terrorists without the backing of a foreign power.
8) Another act (I forget the name) is passed to allow the feds to secure money from international terrorist accounts.
9) Too many congressional acts running around, so FISA, the USA Act, and the money-securing one are all tied up with a pretty bow and called the USA PATRIOT Act.
10) The media pretends this is completely new and runs story after story about abuses of the Patriot Act.
That is a starting point for understanding the mess. I *strongly* suggest reading more on the Congress' website.
See and therein lies the rub. #4 and #5 are not clearly defined, leading to gross abuse of the provisions.
I do not disagree in any way with that. I disagree with those that make statements like, "The Patriot Act allows government to spy on you whenever they like." I work the county. That is government. So, I can spy on anyone I want anytime I like? No. That is why I ask for the debate to be about the real issues. Who decides who is on the FISC? What criteria is needed for the FISC to allow invocation of the FISA/PATRIOT Act? Once invocated, what is required to stop it. Are you open for investigation forever once it starts? There are a lot of things I have a problem with, but that is all below my problem with people claiming that the Patriot Act allows anyone in government to spy on me whenever they like without any valid reason.
Thought that was the whole point of the patriot act - they don't need 'evidence'.
No. That's the whole point of the alarmist's misinterpretation of the USA PATRIOT Act. The actual act is easy to understand. I'm saying that I agree with this system in any way. I'm only stating what I understand by reading through the FISA, USA Act, and USA PATRIOT Act.
1) We think we have a spy/terrorist. Investigate him.
2) We need a warrant.
3) Well, he hasn't comitted a crime yet.
4) Do we have evidence that he may be a spy/terrorist?
5) Yes, but no evidence of a crime.
6) Well then, take it to the Foreign Intelligence Security Court and get them to allow us to do the investigation under FISA/PATRIOT Act.
Pay close attention to number 5. It is not: We have nothing but a hunch, skip the rest of the procedure and do whatever you want. That is what the alarmists want you to think. So, the method they have used is flooding the press, radio, blogs, and anything they can find with misinformation.
The freedoms we curtail, and the unchecked empowerment we grant our government
Unfortunately, the citizens of the United States are not ready to tackle this issue. We still live in a media-controlled mindset of "Praise the President" or "Blame the President". Douglas Adams was joking, but he was more true than I'm certain he would have liked to been when he stated that the primary function of the President is not to weild power, but distract attention away from those who are truly in power.
The President does not make laws. He is merely the last signature on the law. Congress makes the laws. Congress rewrites (I'm sorry, 'amends') the Constitution. Congress decides who gets all your taxes and who doesn't. Congress has even taken away the powers of the President by requiring all Presidential powers to be controlled by Congressional vote. We say that the President appoints cabinets positions and judges, but Congress just has to sit back and say 'no' until the President appoints the guy that they like.
Until the general public sees past the President, past the curtain to the true power in government, we will continue to bicker about pointless things and getting into arguments about what the President did or didn't do, when it is truly what Congress did or didn't do.
Now they can invoke PATRIOT when they start scanning your ID's RFID tag without your consent.
Are you calling me a spy or terrorist? You specifically stated that they (I assume you mean federal investigators as they are the only ones who can invoke the FISA, which I assume you mean when you say PATRIOT) will be scanning *my* ID. The FISC has to allow any invocation of the FISA - commonly misrepresented as invocation of the PATRIOT Act. They are only allowed to authorize it in specific investigations, primarily investigations of spies and terrorists. So, you are claiming that the FISC has reason to believe that I am a spy or terrorist. Well, that pisses me the hell off that some stranger that I've never met would have that opinion of me. I hope you are top on the FISC's list.
I guess Republicans must be looking beyond Bush now, and thinking about how they're going to justify the post-911 decisions they made.
Wow. I never realized that the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives were completely Republican in 2001. They must have a huge cover-up going on right now because the Congress' website lists a hell of a lot of Democrats as serving in 2001 and voting 'yea' on the USA Act and the USA PATRIOT Act.
The USA PATRIOT Act is merely the USA Act and a money-capturing act. The USA Act is a slight upgrade to the FISA. It does not eliminate the FISA. The USA PATRIOT Act does not eliminate the USA Act. So, when parts of the USA PATRIOT Act expire, do they retroactively expire in the USA Act and then on the FISA? The article doesn't mention any of this at all. It just reinforces the common myth that the USA PATRIOT Act is an original set of provisions instead of the easy to discover fact (visit the Congress' website) that it is a conglomeration of provisions that have been around since 1978.
Additionally, what "ID Number" will be required on the license?
It merely states that there must be an ID number. In other words, there must be some unique feature of the identification card that allows them to track it back to the owner of the card. If they didn't require this, two guys with the same name could easily be confused. Hey, we'd never confuse Al-Libbi with Al-Libbey.
Finally, the machine readable technology is set by DHS and can change at their whim.
Keep in mind that it requires a common machine readable technology. Most people are ignoring the work common and assuming that the government will require all IDs to have some expensive crystal matrix technology embedded into them. Think common: Barcodes and Mag Strips are the only common machine readable technologies that I know of. Who says they can't allow one, the other, or both?
No sane congressperson would dare to vote against the troop funding omnibus because all of his peers would immediately label him an enemy of the troops.
Sane congresspeople vote against military and defense spending all the time. They vote to close military bases all the time - putting hundreds of people out of work. There is nothing at all magical about 'troops' or 'military'. It is simply an issue where people focus heavily on the times when military spending is accepted and ignore the times when it is denied.
This is a reply to a topic of peer pressure. Peer pressure is used to invoke inflamtory concepts, such as the Reds are invading Hollywood and we must blacklist all the dang Communists! Peer pressure tells you that you must believe the inflamatory concept at face value. Do not do research. Do not go to the US Congress' website. Do not look up military bills that have been voted on. Do not look at the voting history on those bills. Do not get the facts. Just believe what you are told - oh, and tell it to everyone else. If enough people say it, it must be true.
FTA:
"Practically speaking, your driver's license likely will have to be reissued to meet federal standards."
What standards doesn't my driver's license have? Again, FTA:
At a minimum: name, birth date, sex, ID number, a digital photograph, address, and a "common machine-readable technology" that Homeland Security will decide on.
Checking my driver's license:
[x] Name
[x] Birth Date
[x] Sex
[x] ID Number
[x] Digital Photograph
[x] Address
[x] Machine-readable technology: both a magstrip and a barcode.
What states are issuing driver's licenses without this information on them?
Why two cameras needed?
I didn't have anything to do with the design of this, but I have to assume that two cameras are necessary because you'd have to tilt the camera otherwise. Normally, a satcam is pointed straight down. If you get two images a few meters apart, you can't derive much z-axis data from them. With the cameras tilted so that they converge at the approximate height of the sat, you can derive z-axis information and work out the height of items on the ground.
Of course, you don't *need* two cameras. As I said, you could tilt the camera and take a snapshot of one spot from two angles. A much neater thing to do (in my opinion), would be to put a tilted camera on the outside of spinning ring. Then, try to keep the sat in one position as you take a 360 degree spin around something of interest on the ground. I bet 2 cameras is much cheaper though.