Making falsified return addresses a punishable offense has the side effect of rendering anonymous communications illegal.
Using a falsified return address to get around spam-blocks is ALREADY illegal. Check out legal.web.aol.com. It is a violation of the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, and several judges have agreed.
Yes, but the responsibility for the virus is because it's malicious, not because you said it was good.
Take away the maliciousness and you have no case. There's nothing malicious about a song claiming to be Madonna's "Music" but actually being some RIAA geek saying "Don't pirate."
If you want to find an exact analogy, find a case where I claimed something had value, gave it to you, and it turned out to have zero value while causing no harm. I don't think there is such a case.
Of course that's different - money is changing hands. If I *sell* you something based on misrepresentation, the Uniform Commercial Code is going to apply. But if I *give* you something that isn't what I claimed, you're not out any money.
If they spoof the source IP address in order to work around blocks on the target machine and get access, then they are violating the federal Computer Fraud & Abuse act, and can be sued or prosecuted for same. AOL won several lawsuits against spammers because they forged the headers of their e-mail messages.
I seem to recall that that woman's name is Wanda or Wilma, according to some folks from Aspect, who make (made?) call-processing equipment.
I'm not sure if that refers to the original woman who recorded it, or the woman that you hear everywhere now, at just about any bank and many other call centers..
I seriously doubt a reel-to-reel was used, as I don't recall anyone owning one - though it's possible El did the recordings at his day job, Channel 50 in Fairfax.
The sounds were digitized using a Farallon MacRecorder and SoundEdit, probably by Eric McCormick, who was a developer by day and musician by night. The IM sound is Eric's Korg M1.
CD's can represent sounds digitally up to about 300dB.
Uhh... no. You essentially get about 6dB of resolution per bit. 16-bit audio (CDs) has about 96dB of dynamic range. 24-bit audio has a range of 144dB.
Now, because of modern dithering techniques, and probably the weirdness of psychoacoustics, you can hear more of a dynamic range than the signal actually carries. Jay Frigoletto's excellent Tech Talk section (http://www.promastering.com/) says that people can hear a sound at -110dBFS on a good 16-bit system.
But 300 dB? No. Besides, 300 dB above the softest sound you can hear would probably kill you. 120 dB(SPL) is the threshold of pain. A jet engine at 50 feet has an SPL of about 140 dB.
300 dB is 160 dB more than 140 dB. Every 3 dB doubles power (though not perceived loudness); 160 is about 3*53. 2^53 is 9,007,199,254,740,992. 300 dB is 9 *QUADRILLION* times as powerful as a jet engine at 50 fet. Yeah, I think it'd kill you.
Despite Vidomi's characterization of the letter, this letter is very clearly and explicitly written by an attorney who HAPPENS also to be the FSF's "volunteer General Counsel", but who is writing this as counsel retained BY VIDOMI.
You read that right. The letter states quite clearly that Vidomi retained Prof. Moglen to get his educated opinion on the legality of their system. The letter is written on his Columbia letterhead. The FSF has nothing to do with this opinion letter.
It seems to me that Vidomi has the in-writing opinion of FSF's own general counsel, as well as the opinion of one of the GPL-code authors, but very much doesn't have RMS's blessing. I don't think the story ends here.
Anyone titling an idea "A Modest Proposal" who still thinks it's clever and droll - two centuries after the original was published - should be shot on sight and eaten. Who's with me?
Next week, we will see another article telling us that Slashdot was down because of a router problem, but is now back up. This article will be written as if the author had never read the first one.
I'm no EE, but AIUI, the problem is that DACs, like any other component, aren't perfect. Often, the lower bit or two of the DAC isn't particularly accurate. Think of it as the equivalent of "significant digits" in scientific measurement.
So you wouldn't really want to use a 16-bit DAC to play a 16-bit recording; if you have a 24-bit DAC, you *know* those top 16 bits are gonna be accurate.
As for oversampling, same basic problem - the data and components aren't perfect. The more times you look at a digital signal, the more accurate you can be as to whether it was a one or a zero. I seem to remember, from my days hacking around in a Commodore 1541 floppy drive, that some register held the current voltage from the head, and it would check a bunch of times and see how long the voltage stayed above some defined level that meant "1". Or something like that.
Remember that nothing is truly digital. The bits on the disc are still analog representations of digital data, and have to be turned into a one or a zero in memory - which, itself, isn't really a one or a zero, but a close-enough approximation that we can reliably determine which value we originally stored. If the input path of a CD's data was perfect, we wouldn't need Reed-Solomon.
When every bit is set to zero several times over, however, then there is no way in hell you will find old data on the drive.
I think you mean "there is no way in hell you will find old data on the drive unless there was some advanced technology mentioned three times above in responses I didn't bother to read before posting my own."
Actually, not even the reporter claimed that. All he claimed was that the Pentagon found a way to balance two competing goals - which they did. It is only geeks like us that instantly read "found a way" as "developed new technology".
No, customers don't have to "support TiVo like some kind of charity". My point was that TiVo:
- pays you $200 to buy the box,
- allows you to use the box without paying them a dime,
- allows you to use their network and leased dialups to keep the time and software on the box current without a subscription,
- takes the time and effort to test how at least part of the box works without a subscription,
- takes the time and effort to release a new version of their software to fix the bugs they missed for the people who don't want to pay TiVo anything, and
- takes up the significant network bandwidth to download this upgrade to all of their users...
...and people are STILL BITCHING!
You say you think people would be willing to pay more up front to avoid dealing with this? Then why didn't they? If you pay the lifetime subscription fee (which was, until recently, $200 - hey, what a coincidence!) then not only avoid this apparent charity-guilt complex, but you get the programming guide for free. Let's do that math out loud: All you have to do to get the guide is *pay TiVo the money back that they paid you*. What a deal!
Frankly, I see TiVo giving a lot more support here - for NEGATIVE payment - than some of the free software icons like FSF.
- Environment is important. Get an Aeron. Get an adjustable foot rest. Get a sturdy keyboard tray that doesn't interfere with your knees, and keep the mouse ON IT so you are not bending forward to use it. That last part is often missing.
- Have some sort of regular bodywork. Some chiropractors can do miracles; even if their mental model for what they're doing is whacked, the manipulation itself helps loosen you up, same as massage, only covered by insurance. (But do check out www.quackwatch.com for some strong contrarian views.) If you don't like chiropractic, get massages, or physical therapy (also covered to a point).
- Do your OWN bodywork. Exercise is critical. The simplest exercises can help your lower back, like lower-ab crunches (lie on your back, bring your knees up without using momentum, hold) or back bridging (lie on your back, hands over your head, palms to the floor, lift with hands and knees and arch your back). Get "Stronger Abs and Back", by Dean and Greg Brittenham, and read it.
Re:...when pigs fly and IPv6 is implemented
on
Smart Routers
·
· Score: 1
we need an international, independent, governing body for DNS and the internet, not an American-controlled company.
The fact is that the defense was forbidden from revealing anything to the jury that would show that the "religion" in question was Scientology since this would have (rightly so) prejudiced them.
I do understand why the judge wanted to keep the name of the religion from the jury. But, and IANAL, I find it hard to believe that the complete elimination of the quotes' context didn't violate some derivation of his 8th amendment rights. I strongly suspect that either (a) he had a lawyer who wasn't competent to defend his constitutional rights, or (b) the judge was an idiot who would be easily reversed on appeal.
The guy needs to engage the ACLU and the EFF, not to move to Canada.
AOL mail has none of the collaborative groupware features of any of the major commercially-oriented email solutions.
To me, that's probably the biggest drawback - not the client, not SecurID. Some of the threads here reported alternative groupware that they'll be using, and we'll see how that works out.
Slashdot Mirror
Making falsified return addresses a punishable offense has the side effect of rendering anonymous communications illegal.
Using a falsified return address to get around spam-blocks is ALREADY illegal. Check out legal.web.aol.com. It is a violation of the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, and several judges have agreed.
Jay, the (ex) AOL Mail Guy
Yes, but the responsibility for the virus is because it's malicious, not because you said it was good.
Take away the maliciousness and you have no case. There's nothing malicious about a song claiming to be Madonna's "Music" but actually being some RIAA geek saying "Don't pirate."
If you want to find an exact analogy, find a case where I claimed something had value, gave it to you, and it turned out to have zero value while causing no harm. I don't think there is such a case.
Of course that's different - money is changing hands. If I *sell* you something based on misrepresentation, the Uniform Commercial Code is going to apply. But if I *give* you something that isn't what I claimed, you're not out any money.
I do not believe there are laws against misrepresentation except as it applies to a commercial transaction.
It is perfectly legal for me to say "In this package is a machine that will make you permanently ecstatic" when in fact the package contains bricks.
It is even legal for me to say the above and then hand you the package.
It is illegal for me to say the above and then *take your money* for the package.
IANAL.
If they spoof the source IP address in order to work around blocks on the target machine and get access, then they are violating the federal Computer Fraud & Abuse act, and can be sued or prosecuted for same. AOL won several lawsuits against spammers because they forged the headers of their e-mail messages.
Jay, the ex-Mail Guy
why we all think software-defined radios are cool but software-defined modems are crap?
I seem to recall that that woman's name is Wanda or Wilma, according to some folks from Aspect, who make (made?) call-processing equipment.
I'm not sure if that refers to the original woman who recorded it, or the woman that you hear everywhere now, at just about any bank and many other call centers..
I seriously doubt a reel-to-reel was used, as I don't recall anyone owning one - though it's possible El did the recordings at his day job, Channel 50 in Fairfax.
The sounds were digitized using a Farallon MacRecorder and SoundEdit, probably by Eric McCormick, who was a developer by day and musician by night. The IM sound is Eric's Korg M1.
Jay Levitt
Chief Architect, Mail Systems
AOL
CD's can represent sounds digitally up to about 300dB.
Uhh... no. You essentially get about 6dB of resolution per bit. 16-bit audio (CDs) has about 96dB of dynamic range. 24-bit audio has a range of 144dB.
Now, because of modern dithering techniques, and probably the weirdness of psychoacoustics, you can hear more of a dynamic range than the signal actually carries. Jay Frigoletto's excellent Tech Talk section (http://www.promastering.com/) says that people can hear a sound at -110dBFS on a good 16-bit system.
But 300 dB? No. Besides, 300 dB above the softest sound you can hear would probably kill you. 120 dB(SPL) is the threshold of pain. A jet engine at 50 feet has an SPL of about 140 dB.
300 dB is 160 dB more than 140 dB. Every 3 dB doubles power (though not perceived loudness); 160 is about 3*53. 2^53 is 9,007,199,254,740,992. 300 dB is 9 *QUADRILLION* times as powerful as a jet engine at 50 fet. Yeah, I think it'd kill you.
As AC pointed out (but didn't get modded up), the document does in fact state that Prof. Moglen was retained by Vidomi.
The "FSF Approval" is no such thing.
Despite Vidomi's characterization of the letter, this letter is very clearly and explicitly written by an attorney who HAPPENS also to be the FSF's "volunteer General Counsel", but who is writing this as counsel retained BY VIDOMI.
You read that right. The letter states quite clearly that Vidomi retained Prof. Moglen to get his educated opinion on the legality of their system. The letter is written on his Columbia letterhead. The FSF has nothing to do with this opinion letter.
It seems to me that Vidomi has the in-writing opinion of FSF's own general counsel, as well as the opinion of one of the GPL-code authors, but very much doesn't have RMS's blessing. I don't think the story ends here.
Anyone titling an idea "A Modest Proposal" who still thinks it's clever and droll - two centuries after the original was published - should be shot on sight and eaten. Who's with me?
- He is inventing coffee technology but can't spell espresso
- He thinks that coffee gets darker as it gets less fresh
- He doesn't take into account the dirtiness of the water or the pot
Yeah, this oughta work real well.
If this means they will be able to afford to stop treating .com as a noise-word in searches!
Next week, we will see another article telling us that Slashdot was down because of a router problem, but is now back up. This article will be written as if the author had never read the first one.
I'm no EE, but AIUI, the problem is that DACs, like any other component, aren't perfect. Often, the lower bit or two of the DAC isn't particularly accurate. Think of it as the equivalent of "significant digits" in scientific measurement.
So you wouldn't really want to use a 16-bit DAC to play a 16-bit recording; if you have a 24-bit DAC, you *know* those top 16 bits are gonna be accurate.
As for oversampling, same basic problem - the data and components aren't perfect. The more times you look at a digital signal, the more accurate you can be as to whether it was a one or a zero. I seem to remember, from my days hacking around in a Commodore 1541 floppy drive, that some register held the current voltage from the head, and it would check a bunch of times and see how long the voltage stayed above some defined level that meant "1". Or something like that.
Remember that nothing is truly digital. The bits on the disc are still analog representations of digital data, and have to be turned into a one or a zero in memory - which, itself, isn't really a one or a zero, but a close-enough approximation that we can reliably determine which value we originally stored. If the input path of a CD's data was perfect, we wouldn't need Reed-Solomon.
When every bit is set to zero several times over, however, then there is no way in hell you will find old data on the drive.
I think you mean "there is no way in hell you will find old data on the drive unless there was some advanced technology mentioned three times above in responses I didn't bother to read before posting my own."
Actually, not even the reporter claimed that. All he claimed was that the Pentagon found a way to balance two competing goals - which they did. It is only geeks like us that instantly read "found a way" as "developed new technology".
No, customers don't have to "support TiVo like some kind of charity". My point was that TiVo:
- pays you $200 to buy the box,
- allows you to use the box without paying them a dime,
- allows you to use their network and leased dialups to keep the time and software on the box current without a subscription,
- takes the time and effort to test how at least part of the box works without a subscription,
- takes the time and effort to release a new version of their software to fix the bugs they missed for the people who don't want to pay TiVo anything, and
- takes up the significant network bandwidth to download this upgrade to all of their users...
...and people are STILL BITCHING!
You say you think people would be willing to pay more up front to avoid dealing with this? Then why didn't they? If you pay the lifetime subscription fee (which was, until recently, $200 - hey, what a coincidence!) then not only avoid this apparent charity-guilt complex, but you get the programming guide for free. Let's do that math out loud: All you have to do to get the guide is *pay TiVo the money back that they paid you*. What a deal!
Frankly, I see TiVo giving a lot more support here - for NEGATIVE payment - than some of the free software icons like FSF.
To be more precise, you should say: "for customers that already paid them".
No. Customers without service have not paid TiVo a dime. TiVo has PAID THEM, indirectly, through Philips or Sony.
You see, TiVo subsidizes every box, or at least they used to. You buying a box COSTS them money that they then make up with subscription fees.
I guess the whiners think hardware also wants to be free?
- Environment is important. Get an Aeron. Get an adjustable foot rest. Get a sturdy keyboard tray that doesn't interfere with your knees, and keep the mouse ON IT so you are not bending forward to use it. That last part is often missing.
- Have some sort of regular bodywork. Some chiropractors can do miracles; even if their mental model for what they're doing is whacked, the manipulation itself helps loosen you up, same as massage, only covered by insurance. (But do check out www.quackwatch.com for some strong contrarian views.) If you don't like chiropractic, get massages, or physical therapy (also covered to a point).
- Do your OWN bodywork. Exercise is critical. The simplest exercises can help your lower back, like lower-ab crunches (lie on your back, bring your knees up without using momentum, hold) or back bridging (lie on your back, hands over your head, palms to the floor, lift with hands and knees and arch your back). Get "Stronger Abs and Back", by Dean and Greg Brittenham, and read it.
we need an international, independent, governing body for DNS and the internet, not an American-controlled company.
What, like ICANN? Yeah, that's worked well.
The fact is that the defense was forbidden from revealing anything to the jury that would show that the "religion" in question was Scientology since this would have (rightly so) prejudiced them.
I do understand why the judge wanted to keep the name of the religion from the jury. But, and IANAL, I find it hard to believe that the complete elimination of the quotes' context didn't violate some derivation of his 8th amendment rights. I strongly suspect that either (a) he had a lawyer who wasn't competent to defend his constitutional rights, or (b) the judge was an idiot who would be easily reversed on appeal.
The guy needs to engage the ACLU and the EFF, not to move to Canada.
AOL mail has none of the collaborative groupware features of any of the major commercially-oriented email solutions.
To me, that's probably the biggest drawback - not the client, not SecurID. Some of the threads here reported alternative groupware that they'll be using, and we'll see how that works out.
What features does Hotmail have that you think AOL doesn't?