Germany doesn't allow dual-citizens (as a matter of course, rare exceptions are granted, with strongly documented reasons). So what are her citizenships? In context, the implication is US/German, but that's banned by Germany.
That's mainly because the scary ones compete with man for hunting the ones with more eatibility. Though bears don't compete with humans, but are heavily hunted.
Personally, I find the meatspace equivelent of a DDoS as everyone who walks up to McDonalds, you punch them in the nose. You are acting to deliberately cause them harm, in both cases.
Actually, you can't picket unless the state lets you, even in the United States. Governments including state governments are allowed to impose "content-neutral time, place, or manner restrictions" on free speech provided that there are sufficient "alternative channels of communication" and the regulation served a substantial government interest that would be achieved less effectively absent the regulation.
You are confusing what can be done with what has been done. *I* can still picket without government permission. That you claim *nobody* can proves you are ignorant (or lying). That you think *you* can't indicates you should move. Yes, the government could stop me from picketing, with a law change.
So, if someone is running an Internet hunting business, and their gun is hacked, and it's shooting into a crowd of people, the police should try to figure out who is controlling the gun without stopping the gun from firing into a crowd.
I see a crime in progress, and an easy way to stop that crime. You are more worried about the rights of the business owner to make a profit than the crowd's right to not be harmed by a negligent business owner.
The common carrier laws don't cover Internet now. And even under them, utilities have the right to disconnect people acting badly. You obviously don't understand how common carriers or laws work.
So you don't mind pulling the plug on a residential connection, but pulling one on a business connection is the line? The business should have more care in their networks than an average user. So they should be pulled much less than grandma. So I wouldn't think it that huge of an issue. Most are residential connections, aren't they?
Ah, you aren't aware of the car owner sent to prison for murder, who wasn't using his car at the time. A "friend" asked to borrow the car. While borrowing the car, he killed someone (not by driving, but robbing someone), so the owner was sent to prison for murder. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R...
Murder conviction for letting someone else use your car seems to indicate that liability for letting someone use your computer is such a weird idea.
It occurs to me that reading comprehension may not be your strong suit. I have yet to see a single comment here that defends compromised computers or DDoS.
You said that the connection participating in a DDoS isn't engaged in a malicious activity. I count that as defense of the compromised computers.The issue of malicious intent has nothing whatsoever to do with the botnet operator and everything to do with the owner of the compromised computer(s)/network.
Ah, it's you who can't read. I said "malicious activity" not "malicious intent" The computer is doing something malicious, even if the user didn't explicitly perform the act.
That said, there ARE ramifications of simply turning off the tap that are not so simply dealt with as you seem to wish were the case. Were it so easy and legally simple, it already would not be an issue, IMO.
It's already a violation of ToS, so shut them off. If that's a problem, change a law to make it no longer a problem.
A compromised system that is operating without the knowledge of its owner does not constitute malicious activity. Malicious activity, by its very definition, is intentional.
So the Botnet owner isn't doing anything malicious when they perform a DDoS? Again, I think your logic is contrived and quite stupid, trying to defend negligent users who are financing attacks.
I said that the DDoS is malicious activity, and the connection is linked to that, and thus can be shut down. You are disagreeing. That makes you dumb or a liar. Which is it?
It amazes me how many people defend compromised computers and those performing DDoSs.
Sure, it's that simple, just tell your customers not to do Bad Things! And tell all those cable modem users not to click on the attachments in their email that might infect their machines, that'll keep them all from doing it, just like it keeps them from buying spamvertised products, and like telling corporate users who have seriously funded IT departments not to be a victim of phishing attacks. Just because you customers are using third-party webmail instead of ISP mail services, that doesn't mean you can't protect them, does it?
Yup. You tell them when they buy the car not to speed. Then, if they do speed, you ignore them. Oh wait, if they speed, the police pull them over. That's the point. The person with the compromised computer is breaking the law. So lets start treating them like the hackers they are.
I have worked for 5 ISPs in the past 15 years. Every one of them had DPI. They all expect laws like this and have things in place for when they do. Sure, the backbone providers with no consumer connections don't bother, but (almost) every ISP that sells consumer connections does have them today. The expense is $0.
I clicked a link. the billionaire who "shot endangered animals on safari" didn't shot any animals, and was armed only with a camera, and never gave the reason that it was in the name of "science" or anything else. So the summary is a lying troll. I agree that there's something else going on. Otherwise why lie so blatantly?
I move $40,000 USD a year. But I don't live in the US. One can survive electronically. And when I lived in the US, I never saw debit fail that left the store open. I've seen Wal-Marts close because their machines were down. They can't do customer service, gift cards, refunds, or anything else. When debit is down, they close stores, not go back to cash, which many people don't carry anymore.
Slashdot Mirror
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G...
Then go edit Wikipedia.
History has also shown that libertarianism doesn't work, but that doesn't stop people from trying.
Germany doesn't allow dual-citizens (as a matter of course, rare exceptions are granted, with strongly documented reasons). So what are her citizenships? In context, the implication is US/German, but that's banned by Germany.
Iraq was far from unprovoked
Then why were all the reasons we invaded lies?
That's mainly because the scary ones compete with man for hunting the ones with more eatibility. Though bears don't compete with humans, but are heavily hunted.
Nope. Before Viagra, plenty of males procreated at advanced age. These days, it's just easier, and accessible to the otherwise impotent.
I hear a 2-year-old bagged a MILF in Wal-Mart.
Personally, I find the meatspace equivelent of a DDoS as everyone who walks up to McDonalds, you punch them in the nose. You are acting to deliberately cause them harm, in both cases.
Actually, you can't picket unless the state lets you, even in the United States. Governments including state governments are allowed to impose "content-neutral time, place, or manner restrictions" on free speech provided that there are sufficient "alternative channels of communication" and the regulation served a substantial government interest that would be achieved less effectively absent the regulation.
You are confusing what can be done with what has been done. *I* can still picket without government permission. That you claim *nobody* can proves you are ignorant (or lying). That you think *you* can't indicates you should move. Yes, the government could stop me from picketing, with a law change.
They could also make guns illegal.
And why is the UK government arresting North Korean nationals in Thailand? After all, that's who we've been told did it.
If not, Sony and the US government committed a conspiracy to start a war. The tinfoil hat crowd didn't go far enough.
So, if someone is running an Internet hunting business, and their gun is hacked, and it's shooting into a crowd of people, the police should try to figure out who is controlling the gun without stopping the gun from firing into a crowd.
I see a crime in progress, and an easy way to stop that crime. You are more worried about the rights of the business owner to make a profit than the crowd's right to not be harmed by a negligent business owner.
The common carrier laws don't cover Internet now. And even under them, utilities have the right to disconnect people acting badly. You obviously don't understand how common carriers or laws work.
So you don't mind pulling the plug on a residential connection, but pulling one on a business connection is the line? The business should have more care in their networks than an average user. So they should be pulled much less than grandma. So I wouldn't think it that huge of an issue. Most are residential connections, aren't they?
No, a court order isn't necessary for the ISP to cut off someone, just for someone to force them to do it.
If you don't know the difference, you are too dumb to discuss this with. If you do know the difference, then you are just trolling me.
Ah, you aren't aware of the car owner sent to prison for murder, who wasn't using his car at the time. A "friend" asked to borrow the car. While borrowing the car, he killed someone (not by driving, but robbing someone), so the owner was sent to prison for murder. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R...
Murder conviction for letting someone else use your car seems to indicate that liability for letting someone use your computer is such a weird idea.
We don't want DPI.
DPI is already there and in use. Since reality proves you wrong, I don't need to.
It occurs to me that reading comprehension may not be your strong suit. I have yet to see a single comment here that defends compromised computers or DDoS.
You said that the connection participating in a DDoS isn't engaged in a malicious activity. I count that as defense of the compromised computers.The issue of malicious intent has nothing whatsoever to do with the botnet operator and everything to do with the owner of the compromised computer(s)/network.
Ah, it's you who can't read. I said "malicious activity" not "malicious intent" The computer is doing something malicious, even if the user didn't explicitly perform the act.
That said, there ARE ramifications of simply turning off the tap that are not so simply dealt with as you seem to wish were the case. Were it so easy and legally simple, it already would not be an issue, IMO.
It's already a violation of ToS, so shut them off. If that's a problem, change a law to make it no longer a problem.
A compromised system that is operating without the knowledge of its owner does not constitute malicious activity. Malicious activity, by its very definition, is intentional.
So the Botnet owner isn't doing anything malicious when they perform a DDoS? Again, I think your logic is contrived and quite stupid, trying to defend negligent users who are financing attacks.
I said that the DDoS is malicious activity, and the connection is linked to that, and thus can be shut down. You are disagreeing. That makes you dumb or a liar. Which is it?
It amazes me how many people defend compromised computers and those performing DDoSs.
Because crime is common, it would be cheaper and easier to abolish the police and stop trying to fix things.
Nope, that's fucked up logic I'll never buy into.
Sure, it's that simple, just tell your customers not to do Bad Things! And tell all those cable modem users not to click on the attachments in their email that might infect their machines, that'll keep them all from doing it, just like it keeps them from buying spamvertised products, and like telling corporate users who have seriously funded IT departments not to be a victim of phishing attacks. Just because you customers are using third-party webmail instead of ISP mail services, that doesn't mean you can't protect them, does it?
Yup. You tell them when they buy the car not to speed. Then, if they do speed, you ignore them. Oh wait, if they speed, the police pull them over. That's the point. The person with the compromised computer is breaking the law. So lets start treating them like the hackers they are.
I have worked for 5 ISPs in the past 15 years. Every one of them had DPI. They all expect laws like this and have things in place for when they do. Sure, the backbone providers with no consumer connections don't bother, but (almost) every ISP that sells consumer connections does have them today. The expense is $0.
It's very economical.
I clicked a link. the billionaire who "shot endangered animals on safari" didn't shot any animals, and was armed only with a camera, and never gave the reason that it was in the name of "science" or anything else. So the summary is a lying troll. I agree that there's something else going on. Otherwise why lie so blatantly?
Arrest the CEO of the edge ISP for hacking, aiding hacking, conspiracy to commit hacking, and see if they decide to cut off criminal users.
Most contracts will allow termination of service for malicious activity.
I move $40,000 USD a year. But I don't live in the US. One can survive electronically. And when I lived in the US, I never saw debit fail that left the store open. I've seen Wal-Marts close because their machines were down. They can't do customer service, gift cards, refunds, or anything else. When debit is down, they close stores, not go back to cash, which many people don't carry anymore.