I can tell you that contacting users before shutting them off is a very bad idea. It's very frequent that a user will have wrong contact info on file when you go to contact them...any time you try to wait to contact them you're almost always just delaying for the sake of somebody who knows nothing about their computer except that how to use word...for the sake of what! Notification == waste of time, 16 years experience agrees with me.
I think one of the main problems with the embedding of XML architecture into office productivity software is unfortunately the end user. I mean, how long have programmes like MS Word had "document properties" contained in them, and how many people are actually using them? I'm currently working on a project to retrieve documents accross a company's backed-up data from the past 10 years, and there is very very little metadata available for us to do any searching on. Unless the embedded XML contained within office suites is brought more "to the fore" and in the face of users, instead of being a behind the scenes 'option', people just are not going to use it
Admit it. With the exception of Apache, Samba is the number one reason that Linux (and BSD, too!) has been able to invade the datacenters of companies the world over.
Without Samba, Linux et al would be in a much less pretty position.
Perhaps we should call it Samba/GNU/Linux?:)
Kudos to the Samba Team, Tridge, and all Samba developers/testers/users!
Reading through the responses to this technology, it seems that several issues are being addressed/readdressed:
1) Mandatory tagging of criminals - There seems to be a fundamental difference between tagging someone as part of their sentence and tagging someone after their sentence has been served (eg, after release from prison). The latter seems a dangerous trend since it indicates that the punishment for certain crimes may change in an arbitrary fashion, even *after* a criminal has served their time and been "rehabilitated" by societal punishments.
Granted, some crimes are heinous and deserve drastic punishments, but punishments should be known at the time of sentencing. Make the punishment as harsh as is warranted (eg, death sentence or consecutive life sentences effectively ensures that an offender never returns to society), but once a punishment has been fulfilled , no additional arbitrary punishments should be levied. Being unable to agree on what the rule-of-law is at the time of sentencing is very bad. A rule-of-law which is not transparent and clear is not a rule-of-law.
2) RFID technology is good|bad - Anyone who has spent their life thinking about technology knows that technology itself it neither our damnation nor our savior. It is amoral and merely a tool created and used by humans to leverage our ideas.
However, history has shown that we have a penchant for killing each other over issues with no obvious resolution (eg, Who's God is better, Who's skin color is better, etc). Technology just speeds up the process of letting us work out our differences, and, when that fails, subjugate/maim/torture/kill the enemy when they it is obvious that they will not take on our point of view.
3) The posters are "anti-technologist fear mongers" - since this crowd is generally very technology savvy, it is probably more likely that you misunderstand the message being articulated. People on Slashdot certainly seem to get more worked up that your general everyday nongeek citizenry. But that is likely because of the "slippery-slope" issues that are addressed. Looking at how humans use and misuse technology to abuse each other, it is often clear to those with a background in technology what form the abuses could take. Generally, it seems that humans eventually arrive at a solution better for everyone (eg, more tolerant), but only after a more short-term period which exploits the technology to the severe disadvantage of an unfortunate minority.
BTW, although annoying that the article is not based on RFID technology, that hardly matters in the grand scheme. GPS, RFID, biometrics, DRM, etc. are all just technologies. They have amazing potential for benefit of societies. But unless the potential for human-rights abuse is acknowledged and carefully monitored, things will get very bad before things get better.
No technology is without potential for abuse. Period.
Let me start out by saying that I don't think this guy has it right...he sounds like a real looney! But the fact remains that we *must* start thinking about how to establish property rights as we settle outerspace, otherwise we won't be able to have a sustainable society. The right to own property is the foremost right of every person and should be defended above all these other "rights" like the right to welfare and non-descrimination. This may seem funny or trivial to you, but if you would think about these kind of issues for a few minutes (maybe read a book about objectivism) you would take this a lot more seriously.
It's been said that they're doing this to stop people from putting linux on the x-box, but what this is really about is them getting practice on putting out hardware that is linux-immune. Mark my words...MS always practices their evil plots 2 or 3 times before they get it right.
I'm a resident of Chesterfield, Missouri. Chesterfield is a rich suburb of St. Louis. I work as a crossing guard at a local elementary school...I have seen, without fail, 3 or 4 cars that cause the lights to change when they approach. Chesterfield is a great community, don't get me wrong, but I think there is a set of schlimeles out there that think way too much of their wealth and are corrupting the system.
ISP's taking some level of responsibility for the actions of their subscribers is *tremendously* important. Spam exists because of the complacency of two entities: ISPs that allow (or even sell bandwidth to) spammers to use their networks; and Microsoft, for making it so easy for computers to be enslaved by spammers (sorry I know that's flaimbait, but it's true.)
Very quickly I wish to say thank you to these hackers and similar programmers working on extending hardwares beyond original manufacturer intentions. I run a small business in India selling computer components. Many times, I am able to get much more out of inexpensive hardware due to peoples projects. In the developing world we simply cannot afford the high prices manufacturers are charging for certain equipment, but with these projects we are able to succeed. Many thanks. Rushabh.
>Eolas have no problems with open source and W3C compliant commercial browsers.
For now... What happens when a few years down the road, the guy running Eolas decides he wants a new jet or yacht? Maybe he just wants to see how much he can get his net worth up to. Who knows what he's planning or thinking.
He's already shown his stance on IP patents, I have no doubts that suing other browser companies is not that far off, regardless of what he says.
A lot of people used Napster, before it was shut down. There was sentiment against file swapping for a short while, but then Kazaa, Morpheus, and others stepped in, and file swapping increased.
After the RIAA sues a few thousand people, and the tide turns against swapping, it will slow again.
But the fact of the matter is that the RIAA members need to come up with a new business model. File sharing will always be around in some fashion, and the technology will just get more and more complex - making it easier to do truely anonymous swapping.
It's been said a million times on here already - the RIAA is just like SCO - they need to adopt a new business model if they're going to survive. Litigation alone won't support them forever.
I am an Isreali citizen living in the United States. It's true that I as a professional do almost all of my work in English. But I am writing to say that being able to use my native hebrew means an awful lot to me and my family. It's not a matter of convenience, it touches on our religous and cultural beliefs. I am very glad to see the government take this action.
It always makes me laugh when I see this comment about letting the private sector take over space exploration.
How would you feel if for the sake of arguement the eventual winner of the X-Prize were to become the MS of space exploration, with almost total control over who does what in space. The private sector is not about bettering mankind, its about profit and many private sector companies are not averse to using very dubious, and in many cases downright criminal methods to achieve their aims. Suppose they discover valuable caches of materials. Do you think they are going to share them with the rest of the world or make us pay thru the nose ? What will the visa requirements be for landing on Planet Microsoft I wonder ? Suppose you are vacationing on Mars and disaster strikes, what do you reckon the odds would be the highest bidders get the first seats off the planet.
In typical fashion the private sector will not become a serious player in space travel until NASA and the other space agencies have made serious reductions in the cost of entry with lots of tax payer research dollars. The private sector will then demand access and want to cherry pick the most lucrative aspects. Remember, there was a time when Bill Gates was an entreprenuer.
What kind of f'd up copyright laws is congress going to pass to deal with this? And gun makers liable for murders? And car makers liable for car accidents? And Slashdot liable for trolls?
Matt Dillon deserves absoluetely no pitty. His outrageous immaturity justified the revocation of his commit bit 1000 times over. Shame on you for painting him to be some kind of victim.
Starting nmap 3.28 ( www.insecure.org/nmap/ ) at 2003-09-15 06:36 PDT Host sitefinder.verisign.com (12.158.80.10) appears to be up... good. Initiating SYN Stealth Scan against sitefinder.verisign.com (12.158.80.10) at 06:36 Adding open port 80/tcp The SYN Stealth Scan took 94 seconds to scan 1643 ports. Warning: OS detection will be MUCH less reliable because we did not find at least 1 open and 1 closed TCP port For OSScan assuming that port 80 is open and port 36304 is closed and neither are firewalled For OSScan assuming that port 80 is open and port 43206 is closed and neither are firewalled For OSScan assuming that port 80 is open and port 44655 is closed and neither are firewalled Interesting ports on sitefinder.verisign.com (12.158.80.10): (The 1642 ports scanned but not shown below are in state: filtered) Port State Service 80/tcp open http No exact OS matches for host (test conditions non-ideal). TCP/IP fingerprint: SInfo(V=3.28%P=i386-portbld-freebsd5.1%D=9/15%Time=3F65C0E9%O=80%C=-1) TSeq(Class=TR% IPID=Z%TS=U) T1(Resp=Y%DF=Y%W=16A0%ACK=S++%Flags= AS%Ops=MNNTNW) T1(Resp=Y%DF=Y%W=16D0%ACK=S++%Flag s=AS%Ops=MNW) T2(Resp=N) T3(Resp=Y%DF=Y%W=16D0%A CK=S++%Flags=AS%Ops=MNW) T4(Resp=Y%DF=Y%W=0%ACK=O %Flags=R%Ops=) T5(Resp=N) T6(Resp=N) T7(Resp=N) PU(Resp=N)
* Stop the Telstra Bulldozer in it's tracks -- support broadband. Canada proves it's possible in a big country
* Sensible censorship
* Sensible copyright
* Serious commitment to anti-spam
* Keep investing and committing to open source
Alston's policies have left Australia as an international IT joke. So much local telent, and so many opportunities in the Asian and global markets have gone to waste. More importantly, every Australian business and consumer has suffered from the 1950s attitudes of the present Aussie govt. Step into the 80s guys, the economy is not all agriculture and textiles!
I lost most of the use of my fingers and 40 percent of my vision in a chemical accident 15 years ago. I am so glad to see linux taking steps to make things more usable for people like me. I truly feel linux will soon take the lead in accessibility (not to mention stability and performance) from Microsoft very soon. Thank you linux hackers!
--Berry
The real problem with WEP isn't the weak method it uses to generate RC4 keys. I've seen with my own eyes many networks that don't even have encryption enabled.
The real problem is that encryption is:
A. Optional.
B. Difficult to set up.
WEP isn't close to being "wire equivalent" because wires are, by default, pretty secure. You don't need to manually enable 'no-public-hub-ports-on-external-walls' mode with a wired Ethernet.
A wire isn't just a way to get the bits from A to B - it also acts as a user interface for associating machines with networks. I bet you didn't think of the patch panel in the server room as a user interface, right? Actually, it's a pretty good user interface. It's much more intuitive than any GUI and very reliable (ok, so it's a little messy, but so is my desktop:-)
Here's an idea for how WEP could have been much closer to 'wired equivalent':
When you set up the device on your machine it scans for available networks and shows a list. You choose one. It then tells you to press a key at the same time as pressing a button on the access point.
If you have physical access to the access point you can do it yourself. Otherwise you call the admin on the phone and after checking your identity (usually it's just a matter of recognizing your voice) the admin tells you to press the key '...now!'. That's it. You're on the network, with securely configured strong encryption.
This can be much more secure that it appears - the key is exchanged using Diffie-Hellman key exchange so eavesdropping is not possible. Man-in-the-middle attacks are difficult in a shared medium such as wireless where everyone hears everyone else: if the two participants are careful they can detect such attacks. To prevent attempts to 'take a ride' and join the network at the same time as another machine the access point will verify that there are no other attempts to join the network within a certain period before or after the time window for 'simultaneous' button presses (actually within plus or minus a few hundred milliseconds).
Now, what are the chances of some company actually implementing this?
Slashdot Mirror
See exact same post here
Direct Rip-off. Please Mod Down.
I can tell you that contacting users before shutting them off is a very bad idea. It's very frequent that a user will have wrong contact info on file when you go to contact them...any time you try to wait to contact them you're almost always just delaying for the sake of somebody who knows nothing about their computer except that how to use word...for the sake of what! Notification == waste of time, 16 years experience agrees with me.
I think one of the main problems with the embedding of XML architecture into office productivity software is unfortunately the end user. I mean, how long have programmes like MS Word had "document properties" contained in them, and how many people are actually using them? I'm currently working on a project to retrieve documents accross a company's backed-up data from the past 10 years, and there is very very little metadata available for us to do any searching on. Unless the embedded XML contained within office suites is brought more "to the fore" and in the face of users, instead of being a behind the scenes 'option', people just are not going to use it
Admit it. With the exception of Apache, Samba is the number one reason that Linux (and BSD, too!) has been able to invade the datacenters of companies the world over.
:)
Without Samba, Linux et al would be in a much less pretty position.
Perhaps we should call it Samba/GNU/Linux?
Kudos to the Samba Team, Tridge, and all Samba developers/testers/users!
Reading through the responses to this technology, it seems that several issues are being addressed/readdressed:
1) Mandatory tagging of criminals - There seems to be a fundamental difference between tagging someone as part of their sentence and tagging someone after their sentence has been served (eg, after release from prison). The latter seems a dangerous trend since it indicates that the punishment for certain crimes may change in an arbitrary fashion, even *after* a criminal has served their time and been "rehabilitated" by societal punishments.
Granted, some crimes are heinous and deserve drastic punishments, but punishments should be known at the time of sentencing. Make the punishment as harsh as is warranted (eg, death sentence or consecutive life sentences effectively ensures that an offender never returns to society), but once a punishment has been fulfilled , no additional arbitrary punishments should be levied. Being unable to agree on what the rule-of-law is at the time of sentencing is very bad. A rule-of-law which is not transparent and clear is not a rule-of-law.
2) RFID technology is good|bad - Anyone who has spent their life thinking about technology knows that technology itself it neither our damnation nor our savior. It is amoral and merely a tool created and used by humans to leverage our ideas.
However, history has shown that we have a penchant for killing each other over issues with no obvious resolution (eg, Who's God is better, Who's skin color is better, etc). Technology just speeds up the process of letting us work out our differences, and, when that fails, subjugate/maim/torture/kill the enemy when they it is obvious that they will not take on our point of view.
3) The posters are "anti-technologist fear mongers" - since this crowd is generally very technology savvy, it is probably more likely that you misunderstand the message being articulated. People on Slashdot certainly seem to get more worked up that your general everyday nongeek citizenry. But that is likely because of the "slippery-slope" issues that are addressed. Looking at how humans use and misuse technology to abuse each other, it is often clear to those with a background in technology what form the abuses could take. Generally, it seems that humans eventually arrive at a solution better for everyone (eg, more tolerant), but only after a more short-term period which exploits the technology to the severe disadvantage of an unfortunate minority.
BTW, although annoying that the article is not based on RFID technology, that hardly matters in the grand scheme. GPS, RFID, biometrics, DRM, etc. are all just technologies. They have amazing potential for benefit of societies. But unless the potential for human-rights abuse is acknowledged and carefully monitored, things will get very bad before things get better.
No technology is without potential for abuse. Period.
Let me start out by saying that I don't think this guy has it right...he sounds like a real looney! But the fact remains that we *must* start thinking about how to establish property rights as we settle outerspace, otherwise we won't be able to have a sustainable society. The right to own property is the foremost right of every person and should be defended above all these other "rights" like the right to welfare and non-descrimination. This may seem funny or trivial to you, but if you would think about these kind of issues for a few minutes (maybe read a book about objectivism) you would take this a lot more seriously.
It's been said that they're doing this to stop people from putting linux on the x-box, but what this is really about is them getting practice on putting out hardware that is linux-immune. Mark my words...MS always practices their evil plots 2 or 3 times before they get it right.
What happened since then??? :)
I'm a resident of Chesterfield, Missouri. Chesterfield is a rich suburb of St. Louis. I work as a crossing guard at a local elementary school...I have seen, without fail, 3 or 4 cars that cause the lights to change when they approach. Chesterfield is a great community, don't get me wrong, but I think there is a set of schlimeles out there that think way too much of their wealth and are corrupting the system.
ISP's taking some level of responsibility for the actions of their subscribers is *tremendously* important. Spam exists because of the complacency of two entities: ISPs that allow (or even sell bandwidth to) spammers to use their networks; and Microsoft, for making it so easy for computers to be enslaved by spammers (sorry I know that's flaimbait, but it's true.)
sorry I was referring to other hardware, not the hardware in question
Very quickly I wish to say thank you to these hackers and similar programmers working on extending hardwares beyond original manufacturer intentions. I run a small business in India selling computer components. Many times, I am able to get much more out of inexpensive hardware due to peoples projects. In the developing world we simply cannot afford the high prices manufacturers are charging for certain equipment, but with these projects we are able to succeed. Many thanks. Rushabh.
>Eolas have no problems with open source and W3C compliant commercial browsers.
For now... What happens when a few years down the road, the guy running Eolas decides he wants a new jet or yacht? Maybe he just wants to see how much he can get his net worth up to. Who knows what he's planning or thinking.
He's already shown his stance on IP patents, I have no doubts that suing other browser companies is not that far off, regardless of what he says.
.
Lameness filter encountered. Post aborted!
Reason: You can type more than that for your comment.
A lot of people used Napster, before it was shut down. There was sentiment against file swapping for a short while, but then Kazaa, Morpheus, and others stepped in, and file swapping increased.
After the RIAA sues a few thousand people, and the tide turns against swapping, it will slow again.
But the fact of the matter is that the RIAA members need to come up with a new business model. File sharing will always be around in some fashion, and the technology will just get more and more complex - making it easier to do truely anonymous swapping.
It's been said a million times on here already - the RIAA is just like SCO - they need to adopt a new business model if they're going to survive. Litigation alone won't support them forever.
I am an Isreali citizen living in the United States. It's true that I as a professional do almost all of my work in English. But I am writing to say that being able to use my native hebrew means an awful lot to me and my family. It's not a matter of convenience, it touches on our religous and cultural beliefs. I am very glad to see the government take this action.
It always makes me laugh when I see this comment about letting the private sector take over space exploration.
How would you feel if for the sake of arguement the eventual winner of the X-Prize were to become the MS of space exploration, with almost total control over who does what in space. The private sector is not about bettering mankind, its about profit and many private sector companies are not averse to using very dubious, and in many cases downright criminal methods to achieve their aims. Suppose they discover valuable caches of materials. Do you think they are going to share them with the rest of the world or make us pay thru the nose ? What will the visa requirements be for landing on Planet Microsoft I wonder ? Suppose you are vacationing on Mars and disaster strikes, what do you reckon the odds would be the highest bidders get the first seats off the planet.
In typical fashion the private sector will not become a serious player in space travel until NASA and the other space agencies have made serious reductions in the cost of entry with lots of tax payer research dollars. The private sector will then demand access and want to cherry pick the most lucrative aspects. Remember, there was a time when Bill Gates was an entreprenuer.
What kind of f'd up copyright laws is congress going to pass to deal with this?
And gun makers liable for murders? And car makers liable for car accidents? And Slashdot liable for trolls?
Matt Dillon deserves absoluetely no pitty. His outrageous immaturity justified the revocation of his commit bit 1000 times over. Shame on you for painting him to be some kind of victim.
Starting nmap 3.28 ( www.insecure.org/nmap/ ) at 2003-09-15 06:36 PDT ... good. :365 .1%D=9/15%Time=3F65C0E9%O=80%C=-1)% IPID=Z%TS=U)= AS%Ops=MNNTNW)g s=AS%Ops=MNW)A CK=S++%Flags=AS%Ops=MNW)O %Flags=R%Ops=))
Host sitefinder.verisign.com (12.158.80.10) appears to be up
Initiating SYN Stealth Scan against sitefinder.verisign.com (12.158.80.10) at 06
Adding open port 80/tcp
The SYN Stealth Scan took 94 seconds to scan 1643 ports.
Warning: OS detection will be MUCH less reliable because we did not find at least 1 open and 1 closed TCP port
For OSScan assuming that port 80 is open and port 36304 is closed and neither are firewalled
For OSScan assuming that port 80 is open and port 43206 is closed and neither are firewalled
For OSScan assuming that port 80 is open and port 44655 is closed and neither are firewalled
Interesting ports on sitefinder.verisign.com (12.158.80.10):
(The 1642 ports scanned but not shown below are in state: filtered)
Port State Service
80/tcp open http
No exact OS matches for host (test conditions non-ideal).
TCP/IP fingerprint:
SInfo(V=3.28%P=i386-portbld-freebsd
TSeq(Class=TR
T1(Resp=Y%DF=Y%W=16A0%ACK=S++%Flags
T1(Resp=Y%DF=Y%W=16D0%ACK=S++%Fla
T2(Resp=N)
T3(Resp=Y%DF=Y%W=16D0%
T4(Resp=Y%DF=Y%W=0%ACK=
T5(Resp=N)
T6(Resp=N)
T7(Resp=N
PU(Resp=N)
TCP Sequence Prediction: Class=truly random
Difficulty=9999999 (Good luck!)
TCP ISN Seq. Numbers: 673A4C36 652AB817 BBE534C3 685BB54A
IPID Sequence Generation: All zeros
Nmap run completed -- 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 137.552 seconds
* Stop the Telstra Bulldozer in it's tracks -- support broadband. Canada proves it's possible in a big country * Sensible censorship * Sensible copyright * Serious commitment to anti-spam * Keep investing and committing to open source Alston's policies have left Australia as an international IT joke. So much local telent, and so many opportunities in the Asian and global markets have gone to waste. More importantly, every Australian business and consumer has suffered from the 1950s attitudes of the present Aussie govt. Step into the 80s guys, the economy is not all agriculture and textiles!
I lost most of the use of my fingers and 40 percent of my vision in a chemical accident 15 years ago. I am so glad to see linux taking steps to make things more usable for people like me. I truly feel linux will soon take the lead in accessibility (not to mention stability and performance) from Microsoft very soon. Thank you linux hackers! --Berry
The real problem with WEP isn't the weak method it uses to generate RC4 keys. I've seen with my own eyes many networks that don't even have encryption enabled. The real problem is that encryption is: A. Optional. B. Difficult to set up. WEP isn't close to being "wire equivalent" because wires are, by default, pretty secure. You don't need to manually enable 'no-public-hub-ports-on-external-walls' mode with a wired Ethernet. A wire isn't just a way to get the bits from A to B - it also acts as a user interface for associating machines with networks. I bet you didn't think of the patch panel in the server room as a user interface, right? Actually, it's a pretty good user interface. It's much more intuitive than any GUI and very reliable (ok, so it's a little messy, but so is my desktop :-)
Here's an idea for how WEP could have been much closer to 'wired equivalent':
When you set up the device on your machine it scans for available networks and shows a list. You choose one. It then tells you to press a key at the same time as pressing a button on the access point.
If you have physical access to the access point you can do it yourself. Otherwise you call the admin on the phone and after checking your identity (usually it's just a matter of recognizing your voice) the admin tells you to press the key '...now!'. That's it. You're on the network, with securely configured strong encryption.
This can be much more secure that it appears - the key is exchanged using Diffie-Hellman key exchange so eavesdropping is not possible. Man-in-the-middle attacks are difficult in a shared medium such as wireless where everyone hears everyone else: if the two participants are careful they can detect such attacks. To prevent attempts to 'take a ride' and join the network at the same time as another machine the access point will verify that there are no other attempts to join the network within a certain period before or after the time window for 'simultaneous' button presses (actually within plus or minus a few hundred milliseconds).
Now, what are the chances of some company actually implementing this?