Yes, you can. Because Kerry conceded the race.
Given the fucking armada of legal action ALREADY WRITTEN and pending filing, it is safe to say that it was a legit victory in the minds of the Kerry camp.
Here's an interesting little sidebar of our system of government confirmed recently by the crack Countdown research staff: no Presidential candidate's concession speech is legally binding. The only determinants of the outcome of election are the reports of the state returns boards and the vote of the Electoral College.
[...]
If memory serves me right i read here in a different thread that you'll have to wait till 11 decembre, but frankly i'm not sure on that date.
The Internation Criminal Court would place US citizens under non-constitutional authority and law. All US citizens (even military) are protected by the US constitution and guaranteed certain "inalienable" rights.
The president would have been in gross violation of his oath of office to have allowed US citizens to be prosecuted by a non-US court.
That's no problem if you accept the other side of the razorblade: stay the heck out of other countries.
Its not the world's problem your Constitution is broken. Broken, as in, i take it you agree its quite pathetic a US soldier may elsewhere do anything he/she wants to without a chance that when what he/she does is unlawful he/she will be brought to justice. US soldiers are no holy people who cannot do something wrong. They're humans. Humans make mistakes. Humans don't abide laws. Humans do sick things. For example, as seen in Abu Graib.
(Another reason why people could see the US as hypocrits. Why do you think you have anything to say about Hussain or Iraq if the people who do the dirty work for you while they're in foreign countries may do anything they want to based on your Constitution? It weren't the WMDs...)
I think you once again either misunderstood my post or ignored a huge part of it. Instead you argue the credibility of a source i posted while it is 1) not even important for my arguments 2) one of the many sources available. Dave, i can use your post to show someone how you are somehow biased too, but it makes no sense.
Almost everything under the sun, in fact, except the one thing that can actually help: passing a blanket federal law to require all jurisdictions to use equipment that provides the ONE thing that solves this problem completely: a voter-verified permanent paper trail for every vote.
Why didn't that happen right after US/2000 or right after CA/2003?
NO WHERE in that list does it say anything about the two bills in the House and Senate that will add permanent, voter-verified paper receipts to every ballot cast, as well as add additional tamper-proofing measures. (Both linked and mentioned in my parent post.)
Point taken. However it does not mean the other ways are a no-no. Those bills can fail or succeed. The flaw is that the people have no direct power over any of these bills so they have to take their responsibility in a different way. By raising awareness by activism as well as by proving it currently went right (or wrong) we have more clear arguments which are before or against it. That ought to be possible in a democracy. If that is not possible there is a loophole right now!
First, that's posted on a decidedly partisan site. [...]
Not important, except for FUD. According to this rhetoric, and because of the polarisation, a police officer should not be taken seriously if (s)he were a democrat and you were a republican or [vice versa] if (s)he were republican and you were a democrat. Everyone is biased. That by itself, as i put in my previous post, does not mean the argument or cause should not be taken seriously; thats a fallacy which draws the discussion away from the actual problem. Heck, it'd mean there could be no election judges because 'everyone is biased'. That standpoint is impractical.
Instead, it encourages people who have no experience to start scrutinizing voting returns in counties, putting bumper stickers and signs on their cars, showing politically charged films, annoying techniques for "urgently" "blurting out" random, ridiculous comments related to e-voting, already assuming there's fraud (no, seriously, anyone who didn't visit the link, you HAVE to see this), complaining everywhere possible, even apparently advocating vandalizing property that does not belong to you to get out ostensibly divisive, incendiary messages about e-voting fraud, etc.
Sorry, i don't see how it does advocate that. That is, how the original poster did advocate that. I have not read the replies and they're of no concern for the actual arguments posted there which are actually one of the many websites on the Internet which argue that. I agree it is better to ignore these subjective viewpoints except for the point of activism for i believe that point is valid and useful as argued here above.
But they'd rather fuel the flames who think Bush has now stolen not one, but two elections, and concentrate on conspiracy theories
An appeal to authority from an ANONYMOUS person, who claims that the ENTIRE media has been "locked down tight", implying that there was widespread fraud that already illegitimately handed Bush the election. And, of course, that NO media organization at all will talk about it. How convenient. Wow. No, that's not fucking designed specifically to get democraticunderground's readers pissed off, nope, not at all.
You'd think someone really concerned about this would urge people to contact their representatives and senators to support the legislation that
For the sake of clearity: i quote in reverse order.
I didn't vote for Bush... [...] closet [...]
People, this is of no concern and better to be ignored as the flame by your parent. Just because you have a black friend doesn't mean you cannot be a racist, but it doesn't proof you are either. Ultimately, it doesn't matter for the argument only for the bias; but the latter ain't proven. Lets not resort to such fallacies.
How is it that we can build reliable, accountable systems to handle power, money, and everything else in our society, but somehow it's fundamentally impossible to expect that it could be done with voting. As I've said, I AGREE that we should have a paper trail:
I'm wondering about the same and we agree there should be a paper trail. We appear to agree on this, but on other details we appear to disagree. I'm gonna try and show why your standpoint is not coherent hereunder.
But they haven't gone down that road because the whole purpose of e-voting was to eliminate paper ballots, and all the headaches (spoilage, recounts, disenfranchisement via old/malfunctioning mechanical equipment, etc.) that go along with them.
Apparently their goal was not so smart given this lack of paper trail removes evidence which is needed (we agree on that as pointed out in the quote before this one).
It's the responsibility of the government and municipalities to demand hardware that provides what they need (i.e., a paper audit trail). No e-voting vendor is going to refuse to build something that municipalities will buy.
Apparently the government has not taken that responsibility. The government's goal was not smart (remove dependence on paper trail). Does it matter who won the elections for such standpoint? To me, no.
Now, given the government did not take that responsibility and made an unwise decision. Therefore it is now time for the people to take action and proof to the government that they were wrong for once and for all. Government officials should have done the best they can; now it is time for the people to do the best they can by taking action, playing detective, finding irregulations, voter intimidation or even fraud as pointed out by BBV: Help America Audit -- 5 Things You Can Do Immediately, among others.
The goal is not to get the Democrats into the White House. Even if some biased people have that goal they're dreamers who have a goal which is far, far away. Instead, the sole goal for people who aren't partisan zealots is justice. There 'could' be a side effect, but nobody knows how likely that side effect is, it can be drawn either way, and a lot has to be proven first (hence 'far, far away').
That's my beef with you. You're a subscriber who has his message ready [this time] 17 minutes after the story got posted. I find it a gift you were able to read and write that fast. Moreover i read much of the same from you as in other related stories: the Dems lost, get over it is the message surrounded by more of the same. Clearly thats not the issue. The issue is voting irregulations, fraud. If it is still not clear: irregulations, fraud from either side. "Those who were responsible for it should be brought to justice" -- as Bush said. As many as possible, as soon as possible.
Note how i am not from the USA nevertheless i find this very important not only for the democratic republic of subject. Also as precedent for other countries, groups, hierarchies [and those who depend on these] who'd like to resort to eletronic voting.
Please consider my above concern and please consider stopping to view this as a partisan process for it is not. It is people working for democratic justice with a minor d. Thank you.
I would assume that in most countries, it is possible for a President or Prime Minister to win an election witout actually getting a majority or even plurality of the popular vote.
True, then again
1) The biggest party with PM has to cooperate with other parties. IOW none of those parties is able to fully do what they wanted. 2) There are more than 2 parties. That is to say, more than 2 parties which have the potential to win.
Tell the reader the other side of the knife as well please. Thank you.
It is probably for the best to try to forget about it, and make sure that these stuff is fixed for the next election.
'Forget about it'? 'Make sure these stuff is fixed for the next election'? I heard the same in 2000 (Gore vs Bush) and in 2003 (CA, where the Austrian actor won).
Opinions like these show how much some value democracy. Personally, i find that value disgusting, and if only this would happen in my country i'd be a lot more active instead of writing columns about it although i have this itch of digging the illogic truth. Without these, and without explaining this skew, we'll never find out the truth behind it.
Besides my opinion about your statement, it is also factually incorrect since this particular case (2004 US election) is being researched by a non-partisan, non-profit effort btw. See Blackboxvoting.org. This research was planned before the outcome of the election. If you look at the forums you notice how they started collecting info on for example 26 october 2004. This indicates they're non-partisan and/or if they are partisan they expected something.
To quote the recent news, from 6 nov 2004:
SATURDAY Nov. 6 2004: A new story, with documents, is going up tonight. It is not about vote fraud. Those are coming. This one is about a certification situation that looks like -- well, you'll see what it looks like. Now, in the area of voting machine fraud, we have experts looking at very problematic information in several locations, but will not release it until conclusions are independently confirmed, hopefully within 24 hours.
Might sound a bit vague to you (or FUD?) but i'm surely looking forward to the details. On the forums, there are several details already. Also see the rest of the news on the website.
As a Canadian I can see that our two cultures are too intertwined for this not to happen, we usually pride ourselves on not being American, but we are always only a few years behind.
Always? Come on.
(First, this is subjective. I assume we agree the liberal / self-choice is progressive and that the religion of one may not be the basis of opression upon another.)
Its not always true regarding civil rights-related freedoms. Canada is on legalizing marijuana (already done?), Canada legalized gay marriage. I'm not sure on euthanasia. (My source for marijuana and gay marriage was Marryanamerican.ca.) Point is: don't even try to legalize any of these in the USA right now! The USA is behind on these aspects. However, (some countries in) Europe and Canada are a tie on these aspects.
I suppose its truly time to move to Europe...
I'm from NL and sure we have euthanasia, abortion, gay marriage, marijuana all legal some of these for decenia but i'm not sure if theres any changes on this subject. Better research that first!
To put it more broad: if you're seriously considering to move to Europe / EU i suggest you research the political climate first, research whats gonna happen in the EU as a whole and do overal research. Europe may have negative sideffects you don't wish for.
Why is there a preponderance of electronic voting machines this year?
Because fraud happened in California about a year ago. Keyword: Diebold.
(Such events as in California don't create confidence. We're able to nullify doubts by recounting and independent research. The outcome can only be in your advantage because its only intention is to assure the democratic values of the USA were properly held; as law demands! Nothing less!)
Well, i was about to try XP and your reply pushed me over the border to try it out. Upgrading to XP didn't work out so i did a clean reinstall.
Besides that, everything basically went okay. Except for one thing. After installing the ATI driver from ati.com (standard, latest version; not the advanced with bells and whistles) and the VIA Hyperion driver (4.43 or 4.53), ET immediately crashes after it starts up or crashes right after its configurated. If this were Windows 98 i'd say its an IRQ conflict but i don't know crap about it. I don't even know how i can debug this. I haven't tested any other games. DirectX 9.0c is installed though.
Mind you, this system is not top notch hardware but at least it does work almost flawless on Linux (when gaming, X server crashes under heavy load e.g. when crond does updatedb and other tasks at ~6 AM. Luckily, that happens at 6 AM, and i'm normally not gaming then).
With my Radeon 9800 PRO i cannot get AGP / Write working on Windows 2000. On Linux (2.6.5 till.8) it works fine. All i need to do is load the modules fglrx, via-agp and agpgart. On Windows 2000, if i enable it, my computer becomes unstable. Even with the Hyperion driver. This means say RTCW: ET works far better on Linux. I have a dual boot, and boot sometimes to Linux to play (this) game -- yes i'm deadly serious..
Billionaire? If all those who cared just gave some money the problem would be solved. ISPs don't want spam, the government doesn't want spam, and internet users don't want spam. Why not donate a few EURs? Especially the ISPs get a lot in return from that, but apparently only BIT and XS4ALL -2 ISPs- donated money.
Agreed. Rejo (from Spamvrij.nl) really did a lot of good investigations. When the accused ones attacked him, accusing Rejo for e.g. libel, he was always able to back up what he said, or did so later because he still depended on some details. His succesful research made various big spammers shitting in their pants.
Martijn Bevelander, Akin Franks, Patrick de Bruin among others, they really got bashed away in the media. Even when they tried to defend themselves, Rejo was able to be too smart, providing details which mattered and looked suspicious. And these discussions were sometimes even live, e.g. on Webwereld.nl. Search of Webwereld.nl for 'Rejo', 'Spamvrij', or one those names i mentioned earlier. Its in Dutch though. Rejo also did some interviews and debates on the public radio in NL, discussing the spam problem.
Dave, you either know something for certain, or you don't. Its a proposition. Although you talk for more than yourself here ('we') you say 'might' be certain which means you believe 'we' are not certain about our certainity! Nice cryptography in audio, it actually means you're not certain
[...] but if Rackspace was not a US company, and were instead e.g. a UK company, how or why would the US have even been involved?
The question ain't 'how or why would the US have been involved' since thats, assuming the US does not have any interest in the data (debatable), a no brainer. The question is rather: what would have happened. Far more interesting. You see, would the UK secret service get away with raiding a server, stealing a harddisk, without stating why? Would the UK get away with shutting down 20 independant media centers? I don't know that, but that's an important part of the difference in scetched situation.
Sheep or point taken? Excuse me, but i seriously think he's trolling, and spreading missinformation. Trolling as seen in parent posts, and misinformation like e.g. saying the addresses of the secret agents were spreaded. That is not true, only the pictures of them, and you have to take that into the relevant context.
if ANYONE is meant to access the data (and in the case of indymedia, it's a website, so you can assume this is the case)
You're mixing up 2 problems: 1) Data integrity 2) Data security
I do not know any data Indymedia has while the FBI or whoever may not KNOW or HAVE a copy of that data. The problem here was #1: there were no (recent) backups. So if the FBI or whoever has the one and only copy, then you have data loss. That's not related to the cryptodisc problem; they can just as well delete your cryptodisc which means you still got dataloss (assuming you don't have a backup).
then the key has to be SOMEWHERE.
Yes, in RAM. You put swap off, ofcourse. After reboot, the password is removed from RAM. Have fun torturing the owner of the data... you rely on him, unless he chose a stupid passwd, wrote it down somewhere, used the same passwd as his root passwd, etc (you know the drill).
(PS: This is also useful against criminals who may steal your data. They can't use it then. Unless they threat you with force. But, say your laptop got stolen on an airport. Works well, ehh..?)
I see you and Fulcrum of Evil discussing this architecture. Does software like this exist? I never heard of this design, but some kind of reference document would be interesting. TIA.
One could set up an encrypted disk with sensitive data with the key not being on the harddisk. However as you noted: 1) Not very practical. Server has to be stable, reboots have to be carefully planned. 2) The server has to be secure. No swap. No useless services. Hardening. Etcetera.
Encrypted disks just makes the disk by itself useless. Next time, law enforcement will just take the whole machine.
They may take the whole machine with them though, good luck with that. They can't use it to boot up in init 1 and access the encrypted data for the simple reason the key is only in the mind of the sysadmins.
What they can do is threaten the data to be deleted if the key ain't given or threaten the sysadmins with some sick law. With proper backups, there's no problem regarding data integrity; but keeping it secret is. Problem here is, there weren't proper backups...
Which means that either someone at the hosting company would have to have the key to decrypt the drive (so each time the machine was rebooted the html drive could be decrypted), or the key would have to be stored on the machine itself. Either way isn't very secure...
No, there's another choice. 3) You are root on your own server and you do not encrypt everything, only sensitive data. hence the server is able to boot up, but after it is booted up, you'll have to set up e.g. cryptsetup to access the encrypted data.
Question is, do you have to turn over your key when the feds ask you for it? I really don't know, i heard wild things about this.
Encrypting the content doesn't guarantee data integrity anyway, and Indymedia doesn't log IPs, so its not really an issue. The issue here is (besides the legal? questions involves) that Indymedia did not have proper backups hence Indymedia currently has data loss! Indymedia set up mirrors, Indymedia has used various sources and old backups to get the local websites back online, but those backups were old. Besids, if Indymedia gets the harddisk back, it is partly not possible or costs lots of work to be sure about the data integrity on the hard disk.
Why should Mozilla be able to access anything in/dev? Why should Mozilla be able to overwrite this file called ~/.muttrc? Or ~/.bashrc? Simple: it should not be able to do this, yet, it is able to do this.
Same true with many other applications.
That is a flaw. Capability-based security is what we need. Not chroots. Or bugfixes. We need a design which works from the ground, and implies less problems from the ground.
How about when you run Windows and need Windows Update? You'll need IE. Plus its hard (if not impossible) to completely, literally dump (uninstall) IE.
The products to be acquired are derived from the Netscape Enterprise Suite and include Netscape Directory Server and Netscape Certificate Management System. Red Hat plans to start marketing these products as part of its Open Source Architecture over the next 6 to 12 months
[...]
"We believe the acquisition of these Netscape assets has tremendous long-term strategic value for the open source industry and Red Hat Enterprise Linux subscribers," said Matthew Szulik, Chairman and CEO at Red Hat.
[...]
Given RedHat's past (they always open sourced their or bought proprietary products and the use the patents only for defensive tactics as bound by their 'social contract') i'd say: you bet! A recent example is GFS which they bought from Sistina. This got GPLed and is being ported to Debian.
Slashdot Mirror
Mar-ke-ting is not a geek's hobby.
From MSNBC (Keith Olbermann)
If memory serves me right i read here in a different thread that you'll have to wait till 11 decembre, but frankly i'm not sure on that date.
That's no problem if you accept the other side of the razorblade: stay the heck out of other countries.
Its not the world's problem your Constitution is broken. Broken, as in, i take it you agree its quite pathetic a US soldier may elsewhere do anything he/she wants to without a chance that when what he/she does is unlawful he/she will be brought to justice. US soldiers are no holy people who cannot do something wrong. They're humans. Humans make mistakes. Humans don't abide laws. Humans do sick things. For example, as seen in Abu Graib.
(Another reason why people could see the US as hypocrits. Why do you think you have anything to say about Hussain or Iraq if the people who do the dirty work for you while they're in foreign countries may do anything they want to based on your Constitution? It weren't the WMDs...)
I think you once again either misunderstood my post or ignored a huge part of it. Instead you argue the credibility of a source i posted while it is 1) not even important for my arguments 2) one of the many sources available. Dave, i can use your post to show someone how you are somehow biased too, but it makes no sense.
Why didn't that happen right after US/2000 or right after CA/2003?
Point taken. However it does not mean the other ways are a no-no. Those bills can fail or succeed. The flaw is that the people have no direct power over any of these bills so they have to take their responsibility in a different way. By raising awareness by activism as well as by proving it currently went right (or wrong) we have more clear arguments which are before or against it. That ought to be possible in a democracy. If that is not possible there is a loophole right now!
Not important, except for FUD. According to this rhetoric, and because of the polarisation, a police officer should not be taken seriously if (s)he were a democrat and you were a republican or [vice versa] if (s)he were republican and you were a democrat. Everyone is biased. That by itself, as i put in my previous post, does not mean the argument or cause should not be taken seriously; thats a fallacy which draws the discussion away from the actual problem. Heck, it'd mean there could be no election judges because 'everyone is biased'. That standpoint is impractical.
Sorry, i don't see how it does advocate that. That is, how the original poster did advocate that. I have not read the replies and they're of no concern for the actual arguments posted there which are actually one of the many websites on the Internet which argue that. I agree it is better to ignore these subjective viewpoints except for the point of activism for i believe that point is valid and useful as argued here above.
People, this is of no concern and better to be ignored as the flame by your parent. Just because you have a black friend doesn't mean you cannot be a racist, but it doesn't proof you are either. Ultimately, it doesn't matter for the argument only for the bias; but the latter ain't proven. Lets not resort to such fallacies.
I'm wondering about the same and we agree there should be a paper trail. We appear to agree on this, but on other details we appear to disagree. I'm gonna try and show why your standpoint is not coherent hereunder.
Apparently their goal was not so smart given this lack of paper trail removes evidence which is needed (we agree on that as pointed out in the quote before this one).
Apparently the government has not taken that responsibility. The government's goal was not smart (remove dependence on paper trail). Does it matter who won the elections for such standpoint? To me, no.
Now, given the government did not take that responsibility and made an unwise decision. Therefore it is now time for the people to take action and proof to the government that they were wrong for once and for all. Government officials should have done the best they can; now it is time for the people to do the best they can by taking action, playing detective, finding irregulations, voter intimidation or even fraud as pointed out by BBV: Help America Audit -- 5 Things You Can Do Immediately, among others.
The goal is not to get the Democrats into the White House. Even if some biased people have that goal they're dreamers who have a goal which is far, far away. Instead, the sole goal for people who aren't partisan zealots is justice. There 'could' be a side effect, but nobody knows how likely that side effect is, it can be drawn either way, and a lot has to be proven first (hence 'far, far away').
That's my beef with you. You're a subscriber who has his message ready [this time] 17 minutes after the story got posted. I find it a gift you were able to read and write that fast. Moreover i read much of the same from you as in other related stories: the Dems lost, get over it is the message surrounded by more of the same. Clearly thats not the issue. The issue is voting irregulations, fraud. If it is still not clear: irregulations, fraud from either side. "Those who were responsible for it should be brought to justice" -- as Bush said. As many as possible, as soon as possible.
Note how i am not from the USA nevertheless i find this very important not only for the democratic republic of subject. Also as precedent for other countries, groups, hierarchies [and those who depend on these] who'd like to resort to eletronic voting.
Please consider my above concern and please consider stopping to view this as a partisan process for it is not. It is people working for democratic justice with a minor d. Thank you.
I would assume that in most countries, it is possible for a President or Prime Minister to win an election witout actually getting a majority or even plurality of the popular vote.
True, then again
1) The biggest party with PM has to cooperate with other parties. IOW none of those parties is able to fully do what they wanted.
2) There are more than 2 parties. That is to say, more than 2 parties which have the potential to win.
Tell the reader the other side of the knife as well please. Thank you.
It is probably for the best to try to forget about it, and make sure that these stuff is fixed for the next election.
'Forget about it'? 'Make sure these stuff is fixed for the next election'? I heard the same in 2000 (Gore vs Bush) and in 2003 (CA, where the Austrian actor won).
Opinions like these show how much some value democracy. Personally, i find that value disgusting, and if only this would happen in my country i'd be a lot more active instead of writing columns about it although i have this itch of digging the illogic truth. Without these, and without explaining this skew, we'll never find out the truth behind it.
Besides my opinion about your statement, it is also factually incorrect since this particular case (2004 US election) is being researched by a non-partisan, non-profit effort btw. See Blackboxvoting.org. This research was planned before the outcome of the election. If you look at the forums you notice how they started collecting info on for example 26 october 2004. This indicates they're non-partisan and/or if they are partisan they expected something.
To quote the recent news, from 6 nov 2004:
SATURDAY Nov. 6 2004: A new story, with documents, is going up tonight. It is not about vote fraud. Those are coming. This one is about a certification situation that looks like -- well, you'll see what it looks like. Now, in the area of voting machine fraud, we have experts looking at very problematic information in several locations, but will not release it until conclusions are independently confirmed, hopefully within 24 hours.
Might sound a bit vague to you (or FUD?) but i'm surely looking forward to the details. On the forums, there are several details already. Also see the rest of the news on the website.
As a Canadian I can see that our two cultures are too intertwined for this not to happen, we usually pride ourselves on not being American, but we are always only a few years behind.
Always? Come on.
(First, this is subjective. I assume we agree the liberal / self-choice is progressive and that the religion of one may not be the basis of opression upon another.)
Its not always true regarding civil rights-related freedoms. Canada is on legalizing marijuana (already done?), Canada legalized gay marriage. I'm not sure on euthanasia. (My source for marijuana and gay marriage was Marryanamerican.ca.) Point is: don't even try to legalize any of these in the USA right now! The USA is behind on these aspects. However, (some countries in) Europe and Canada are a tie on these aspects.
I suppose its truly time to move to Europe...
I'm from NL and sure we have euthanasia, abortion, gay marriage, marijuana all legal some of these for decenia but i'm not sure if theres any changes on this subject. Better research that first!
To put it more broad: if you're seriously considering to move to Europe / EU i suggest you research the political climate first, research whats gonna happen in the EU as a whole and do overal research. Europe may have negative sideffects you don't wish for.
The exit polls were changed at some point by CNN.
e pa ge/cnn_exitpoll1.gifr ound.com/images/homepa ge/cnn_exitpoll2.gif
http://www.democraticunderground.com/images/hom
http://www.democraticunderg
See the difference? I know i do.
Why is there a preponderance of electronic voting machines this year?
Because fraud happened in California about a year ago. Keyword: Diebold.
(Such events as in California don't create confidence. We're able to nullify doubts by recounting and independent research. The outcome can only be in your advantage because its only intention is to assure the democratic values of the USA were properly held; as law demands! Nothing less!)
..I evade spam by definition. Any spam!
SGI just released their new visualisation workstations named Prism. In short, its an Itanium with ATIs running Linux.
Well, i was about to try XP and your reply pushed me over the border to try it out. Upgrading to XP didn't work out so i did a clean reinstall.
Besides that, everything basically went okay. Except for one thing. After installing the ATI driver from ati.com (standard, latest version; not the advanced with bells and whistles) and the VIA Hyperion driver (4.43 or 4.53), ET immediately crashes after it starts up or crashes right after its configurated. If this were Windows 98 i'd say its an IRQ conflict but i don't know crap about it. I don't even know how i can debug this. I haven't tested any other games. DirectX 9.0c is installed though.
Mind you, this system is not top notch hardware but at least it does work almost flawless on Linux (when gaming, X server crashes under heavy load e.g. when crond does updatedb and other tasks at ~6 AM. Luckily, that happens at 6 AM, and i'm normally not gaming then).
With my Radeon 9800 PRO i cannot get AGP / Write working on Windows 2000. On Linux (2.6.5 till .8) it works fine. All i need to do is load the modules fglrx, via-agp and agpgart. On Windows 2000, if i enable it, my computer becomes unstable. Even with the Hyperion driver. This means say RTCW: ET works far better on Linux. I have a dual boot, and boot sometimes to Linux to play (this) game -- yes i'm deadly serious..
Billionaire? If all those who cared just gave some money the problem would be solved. ISPs don't want spam, the government doesn't want spam, and internet users don't want spam. Why not donate a few EURs? Especially the ISPs get a lot in return from that, but apparently only BIT and XS4ALL -2 ISPs- donated money.
Agreed. Rejo (from Spamvrij.nl) really did a lot of good investigations. When the accused ones attacked him, accusing Rejo for e.g. libel, he was always able to back up what he said, or did so later because he still depended on some details. His succesful research made various big spammers shitting in their pants.
;^)
Martijn Bevelander, Akin Franks, Patrick de Bruin among others, they really got bashed away in the media. Even when they tried to defend themselves, Rejo was able to be too smart, providing details which mattered and looked suspicious. And these discussions were sometimes even live, e.g. on Webwereld.nl. Search of Webwereld.nl for 'Rejo', 'Spamvrij', or one those names i mentioned earlier. Its in Dutch though. Rejo also did some interviews and debates on the public radio in NL, discussing the spam problem.
Thanks Rejo. You'd be a good cop
We might not know for certain
Dave, you either know something for certain, or you don't. Its a proposition. Although you talk for more than yourself here ('we') you say 'might' be certain which means you believe 'we' are not certain about our certainity! Nice cryptography in audio, it actually means you're not certain
[...] but if Rackspace was not a US company, and were instead e.g. a UK company, how or why would the US have even been involved?
The question ain't 'how or why would the US have been involved' since thats, assuming the US does not have any interest in the data (debatable), a no brainer. The question is rather: what would have happened. Far more interesting. You see, would the UK secret service get away with raiding a server, stealing a harddisk, without stating why? Would the UK get away with shutting down 20 independant media centers? I don't know that, but that's an important part of the difference in scetched situation.
PS: Who are you?
Sheep or point taken? Excuse me, but i seriously think he's trolling, and spreading missinformation. Trolling as seen in parent posts, and misinformation like e.g. saying the addresses of the secret agents were spreaded. That is not true, only the pictures of them, and you have to take that into the relevant context.
if ANYONE is meant to access the data (and in the case of indymedia, it's a website, so you can assume this is the case)
You're mixing up 2 problems:
1) Data integrity
2) Data security
I do not know any data Indymedia has while the FBI or whoever may not KNOW or HAVE a copy of that data. The problem here was #1: there were no (recent) backups. So if the FBI or whoever has the one and only copy, then you have data loss. That's not related to the cryptodisc problem; they can just as well delete your cryptodisc which means you still got dataloss (assuming you don't have a backup).
then the key has to be SOMEWHERE.
Yes, in RAM. You put swap off, ofcourse. After reboot, the password is removed from RAM. Have fun torturing the owner of the data... you rely on him, unless he chose a stupid passwd, wrote it down somewhere, used the same passwd as his root passwd, etc (you know the drill).
(PS: This is also useful against criminals who may steal your data. They can't use it then. Unless they threat you with force. But, say your laptop got stolen on an airport. Works well, ehh..?)
I see you and Fulcrum of Evil discussing this architecture. Does software like this exist? I never heard of this design, but some kind of reference document would be interesting. TIA.
don't log their IPs in the first place.
Indymedia does not log IPs.
One could set up an encrypted disk with sensitive data with the key not being on the harddisk. However as you noted:
1) Not very practical. Server has to be stable, reboots have to be carefully planned.
2) The server has to be secure. No swap. No useless services. Hardening. Etcetera.
Encrypted disks just makes the disk by itself useless. Next time, law enforcement will just take the whole machine.
They may take the whole machine with them though, good luck with that. They can't use it to boot up in init 1 and access the encrypted data for the simple reason the key is only in the mind of the sysadmins.
What they can do is threaten the data to be deleted if the key ain't given or threaten the sysadmins with some sick law. With proper backups, there's no problem regarding data integrity; but keeping it secret is. Problem here is, there weren't proper backups...
Which means that either someone at the hosting company would have to have the key to decrypt the drive (so each time the machine was rebooted the html drive could be decrypted), or the key would have to be stored on the machine itself. Either way isn't very secure...
No, there's another choice. 3) You are root on your own server and you do not encrypt everything, only sensitive data. hence the server is able to boot up, but after it is booted up, you'll have to set up e.g. cryptsetup to access the encrypted data.
Question is, do you have to turn over your key when the feds ask you for it? I really don't know, i heard wild things about this.
Encrypting the content doesn't guarantee data integrity anyway, and Indymedia doesn't log IPs, so its not really an issue. The issue here is (besides the legal? questions involves) that Indymedia did not have proper backups hence Indymedia currently has data loss! Indymedia set up mirrors, Indymedia has used various sources and old backups to get the local websites back online, but those backups were old. Besids, if Indymedia gets the harddisk back, it is partly not possible or costs lots of work to be sure about the data integrity on the hard disk.
Unencrypted swap would be an issue though.
(Speaking for myself here.)
Why should Mozilla be able to access anything in /dev? Why should Mozilla be able to overwrite this file called ~/.muttrc? Or ~/.bashrc? Simple: it should not be able to do this, yet, it is able to do this.
Same true with many other applications.
That is a flaw. Capability-based security is what we need. Not chroots. Or bugfixes. We need a design which works from the ground, and implies less problems from the ground.
How about when you run Windows and need Windows Update? You'll need IE. Plus its hard (if not impossible) to completely, literally dump (uninstall) IE.
Given RedHat's past (they always open sourced their or bought proprietary products and the use the patents only for defensive tactics as bound by their 'social contract') i'd say: you bet! A recent example is GFS which they bought from Sistina. This got GPLed and is being ported to Debian.