We heartily agree. I said it with 'tongue in cheek'.
It's my belief that the Novell-Microsoft agreement is a serious sham and travesty, although Novell and Microsoft protest otherwise.
Oh those crazy patents. First Microsoft wants to indemnify those estranged SUSE users, but can't pay a poor Korean prof (are any profs paid well enough?) for his patent.
The double edged sword of patent protection will continue to bite all of us, but in this particular case, there might be a smidgen of justice. Perhaps there's a nice way to treble the damages....
They don't want to change over their equipment. They haven't eaten the capital costs in transmitters-- where every broadcast station in the US has had to do so. ALL OF THEM HAVE changed over, with a handful of transulator and repeater sites.
EVERYONE in the US has already capitalized the costs of HD cameras, editing equipment, and the rest of the gear that they need.
Not about consumers, eh? Consumers wanted better rasters, and they got them with HD. ATSC tuners can discriminate more than 26 different video levels-- and many can be found for under US$600.
No-- this is about not wanting to do the asset costs. The CBC would LOVE to have a system similar to the UK where there's a tax on every TV, paid periodically, to help them survive and make their expensive productions.
HD has NOTHING to do with advertising-- that's a crappy sales force with a competitively weak product talking. PBS did it, and the CBC can, too.
The underlying concept, be it mobile or cellular hasn't and won't change.
WiFi exists in cells, as does GSM and CDMA. WiMax has both a point-multi-point approach, or point-point. Both exist in cells, logically, physically, and electrically. This ISO/OSI Layer 1-2 approach isn't going to really change for the forseeable future. When it does, I expect another term might be both appropriate and natural.
Mobiles, a term my UK and Asian friends use, is apt. I use it, too, although I'm an American. My German friends use 'handys' as their term. All three are reasonably correct in usage, and intent.
Cellular as a term is entirely apt, and a good name. My truck is when you get some Starbucks-hopped-up marketing people together to try and change things to bend a market towards them, first semantically, then perhaps, genuinely. Fie on that.
I have no issues with anyone that wants to text, watch movies, listen to MP3s, or use their phone as an eating utensil.
In the same way that there are laptops, notebooks, tablets, sub-mini PCs, and so on, I'll presume that the natural tendency of language to embue definition will continue. Sloth dictates that any combination of more than two words-- even compounded-- is unlikely to become popular and therefore succeed.
It was a phone, contrasted by VoIP phone or analog phone. There are wired and wireless phones. There are mobiles, cells, and so on. No device has re-anchored speech sufficiently to alter these basic terms-- yet. The iPod came close, as it seems to have defined a genre of consumer electronics devices. But it's unlikely to become like kleenex/Kleenex, or another trademark now rendered generic. Because of that, and the fact that the entire class of devices has no useful term other than MP3 player (which is a highly constrained term), the push behind the crest of success of the iPod is likely to continue-- it has odd mindshare. As a friend of mine asked me the other day, WTF is a Zune?
They still work by using cells. Americans and a few others call them cell phones, which is appropriate, even when they use them in WiFi or WiMax mode (which are cell-based, after all). The rest of the world calls them everything from mobiles to 'handys' (in Germany).
The name isn't as important as the functionality. And texting is what racks up revenue; there's no data that supports that texting minutes of use exceed voice use. I've been watching for that data for a long time, and so far, it's only texting revenue that's becoming higher in terms of minutes 'online' than voice.
Although I'll give them credit for a lot of code, good old BSD is the well from whence many operating systems drink.
Given re-invention of code, or code I can 'steal', I'll look at good code and glean the best from it any time. So did Microsoft. So did IBM. So did Novell. It's the sincerest form of flattery, after all.
There's some truth to this, because bloggers have a "can't get no respect" problem that often gives them an attitude that opposes 'legitimate' journalists. 'Legitimate' journalists, in turn, decry bloggers.
At some point, bloggers are useful and convey good information, if not aligned with both legal and journalistic principles. Now journalists are becoming bloggers, and the distinctions are becoming exceedingly blurred.
What we wanted is truth, or opinion, but clear distinctions between the two, and referential rather than specious information. The quality of both journalists and bloggers is now emerging, and there's a price tag for that quality-- and we're willing to pay for it, because we need the truth, we need opinion, and we need referential integrity.
After all NASA has done to put satellites into the drink, endanger astronauts, and soak money like LA uses water, you'd think there'd be no embarrassing bugs like this one. Someone needs to be looking for a job flipping burgers.
I can buy no excuse for something as inane as this. No one takes responsibility any more. There's a project manager that needs to fall on his sword. Or get pushed.
It's folly to deny that we're just out of the age of tribal culture, and many of us are still there. Stir in fear, my-god-is-better-than-yours,-heathen, make some insulting commentary, and it's a recipe for explosiveness.
Add in greed, as in oil greed and thirst (it used to be water and arable land) and you get Iraq, as no proof has been forthcoming of any of the reasons we went to war there. Instead, we shot about $3trillion getting revenge for about 3K deaths.... this after we went to war for Kuwait and rubbed out about 300K Iraqis (so far the total to be 650K+ now).
For what? Oil? Some odd sense of Christian honor? For the poor people caught in the WTC buildings? Islam was comparatively quiet until we stuck a stick up the hornets nest. Now Bush has mobilized some large multiplier of people against the US, and the actual values the US stands for, not the greed of oil politics.
Now more soldiers have been killed than at the WTC and Pentagon and Flight 93 combined. We have almost nothing to show for it. Iraq is crumbling, there will be no oil from there for ages at best, and there are the dead Iraqis, the dead misguided Taliban, lots of soldiers from Italy, Denmark, Germany, Poland, Australia, and the US. There is little hope for peace in the region, the financed debt is enormous-- even mindboggling, and I'll admit: we're nature, and as we get smarter, the stakes get higher and higher. Were it a 'natural', not murderous or 'act of manslaughter' we might indeed forget. But add in the human's bruised ego and testosterone, and stand back, open your wallets, and find some clips.
The SCO case taught us the taxonomy of what's inside Linux, and it's protected. Add to this the GNU utilities, also hand-crafted by RMS. Any patents that Microsoft pulls out of its sleeve and sends torts about will be fodder for the EU community to go ballistic about, and worse, hurt Microsoft's chances to make friends with the OSS & F/OSS communities.
No, this is a case of the enemy of my enemy is my cross-licensed friend. This would never happen while Ray Noorda was alive, but alas, he's gone now. It's probably making Eric Schmidt, who once headed Novell, cringe.
It's all for chest thumping. Nothing to see here. Move along.
Nine different acts give the FCC full authority to do what they did in the Massport decision. They start with The Communications Act of 1933, and go forward. Can they intrude? Yes. Have nexus of authority? Without question.
The 2.4ghz band, when used for unlicensed communications, is fully and internationally acknowledged as free and open for legal communications. That amounts to about anything within power limitations. The FCC can and has ruled effectively in this circumstance, and the Massport arguments ought to result in a serious rethinking about who has the ability to 'authorize' unlicensed wireless activities.
The assets deployed for the old tip-and-ring telephony were and are public trusts; protected monopolies for municipal utility use. Telcos have stolen these assets, their incumbent rights-of-way and easements for their own purposes-- shareholder return and equity. This massive theft goes untested and unnoticed.
The low-hanging fruit of public assets-- the big cities-- are easy pickings. High-density infrastructure pays first. Rural areas and marginal density suburban areas pay less and cost more. Gone is the idea that rural deployments can be subsidized because the telcos believe that their depreciation costs are too high to afford subsidizing low-density deployments. The results: the Congress, already in the back pockets of the telcos, has yanked from the states, the authority to regulate the telcos.
The net effect is that the telcos have the ability to hold consumers hostage in this 'free market', where the telcos have consolidated from nine to just four, depending how you count them. Ah, the free market, where 'free' means 'for shareholders'. Flamebait? Look in your heart.
At best, Oracle can start to build their market. To believe the PR spin, you'd think they'd been kernel hackers from say, 1991. In fact, that's not true. While RHEL is competitive, remember that is free-open-source-software, and Oracle makes not a dime from that. Like RH, they'll add services, interesting apps, research, and perhaps a groupie audience with a Fedora-like effort, or that of OpenSUSE.
If you let Oracle achieve their 'marketshare' from thin air, you're doing injustice to hundreds of thousands of coders that have been evolving the kernel, GNU apps, and lots of interesting and useful apps-- that aren't poised strictly to sell a money maker- in this case the Oracle db.
Yes, Oracle has a powerful sales machine, even legendary. That Oracle now deigns fit to 'sanctify' Linux is more of a johnny-come-lately move while MySQL and PGRE eat their lunch. They also face enormous obstacles with IBM and its alliance with SUSE-- especially overseas. Don't let the marketing kiddies fool you.
PPTP uses a hash. It's tough to crack, save very early editions, which were like wet paper.
IPSec VPNs use a seed of some kind (they vary according to the implementation) or use a temporal key.
SSL uses a nice scheme that's difficult to crunch.
NONE OF THEM, however, protect against keyloggers and their variants. If you look at the wire or air with a sniffing device, however, you'll need to have cracked whatever encryption scheme has been implemented. IPSec with a TKIP/RADIUS-based authentication method is pretty tough to break.... unless you have a keylogger someplace or you can dictionary-attack weak stuff.
The days of one-off systems is pretty much dead
on
SGI Arises From the Ashes
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
And so are the MIPS family of processors. So are many of SGI's core businesses, like selling to the TV networks (now it's Apple-to-Avid with new stuff that simply buries SGI), stringing clientele along to the tune of numerous significant digits for incomplete and ill-designed systems.
The fact that they couldn't hold onto employees because their situation was untennable, with so many chiefs and so few worker bees, may now be changed. It's unlikely that their re-emergence from CH11 will do much to save them. Their emporer still has no clothes and is still charging by the pay-per-view model.
I mean, after all, the genome map wasn't built in a day. Tic tac toe is one thing (forget the latency-- it's as bad as my mother) but what would a mass of DNA goo look like that knows how play Quake?
Having trouble clogging those OC192 NAP connections? Need some local cacheing of CONTENT? That's what Google had in mind-- thwart even the nemisis 'net NOT neutrality' issues and just run some fiber to the local fat routers.
Then it doesn't matter if you're pulling YouTube streams in a death march.
QoS jams? Local replication points? Just hook up the old shipping container full of those cute 8-core CPUs and drain the grid. At least they got some press.
The rule of law is wonderful, and it is not absolute.
Of a number of sorely lacking amendments to the US Constitution are one covering ownership of information about one's self (privacy) and another that would prevent politicians from receiving influence (e.g. foreign contributions, contributions from outside of a district-- and a cap on all of them) among a few others. Without these, we have both very creepy wont for privacy and a bribed legislature at all levels.
Drama? Let's see the drama when you look at your Visa bill and find that someone's snatched your identity. Consider further the sheer amount of video that you're currently displacing, unwittingly, most everywhere you shop, and in numerous public places. Just because you have clothes on doesn't mean it's not wrong. There is a deep presumption of innocence that video cameras thwart in the same way that the receipt checker at the bigbox retailers impugn your integrity by asking you for the receipt. Let some of these slip away, these little rights we have, one at a time, and they'll be gone. And those that state that we've already lost them will be proven correct in their forecast. Now, try and get them back-- it's like taxes-- once you put them in, you'll never see a tax go away. At most, they're replaced by something more hideous. Lose a bit of your integrity here, then there, and they add up until it's hard to have the presumption of innocence any more. Fie on your 'drama'.
And what gives them the right, you see? What gives them the right to record your actions or mine? Just the fact that we're walking down the street?
How far must your privacy be abused before you'll cave? Do you want to be your social security/social insurance/whatevergov-id-theywant for ever? Want that number to be abused, misused, stolen, and other havoc wreaked upon you? What is your tolerance for this? When do you start fighting back? When do you say 555-1212 to the serf clerk that asks it, or the cashier that wants your zipcode? What is the information about you worth to you? How shall it be shanghai'd next?
Is it civil disobedience to crunch a camera or vandalism? I say civil disobedience. Fine me either way. Catch me, first..... that's if you have any cameras left.
Each day I walk out and flip my social finger in the sky. One day, Google Maps will find me, and my act of defiance will be noted in some god-forsaken NSA computer. My address will be found and scheduled for intervention by the thought police, the ones hired by the people that told you of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and other lies. I don't trust them, and I don't believe they have a right to follow me and my affairs. And to my European friends that let cameras monitor every single move they make-- you're already sunk.
If one simply traipses over to MediaMatters.Org, or any of a number of media-watching sites, it takes no rocket science to understand that less privacy=more profits. And as profits are above all, including morality, they must reign, or so we are told.
And as all of the minimum wage serfs sneer at you when they as you for your phone number when you in for a hair trim, it becomes increasingly impossible to remain anonymous, private in one's own affairs, and free from the scrutiny of the self-righteous. Somehow, I must live their concept of the path to Heaven, and deviation is, well, deviant.
So: kick the cameras when you find them. Put a little hood on them and beat them with a hammer. Cut coax. Re-address IP cams to porn feeds. Put chewing gum in appropriate places. Part of freedom is freedom from scrutiny. Burn the man; hack the system . One this is clear: live free or die isn't just for New Hampshire license plates-- you have to live it or surrender it.
Think about it: Cisco going after their biggest customers-- Verizon, AT&T, Deutsche Telekom, Comcast, TW/Brighthouse?
Nope. Not going to happen. And therefore, despite the fact that this patent needs to be thrown out on its ass, it's useless to even have the first tiny tort sent. It's a nihilistic sort of patent to start with....
Slashdot Mirror
One more GD thing to screw up general aviation.
"November Whisky 3 fo niner" what's the icing at one niner five ot ot?"
"You Have Mail!"
We heartily agree. I said it with 'tongue in cheek'. It's my belief that the Novell-Microsoft agreement is a serious sham and travesty, although Novell and Microsoft protest otherwise.
Is there a cultural attitude difference between 'old companies' and new companies regarding patent filings/use/defense?
Oh those crazy patents. First Microsoft wants to indemnify those estranged SUSE users, but can't pay a poor Korean prof (are any profs paid well enough?) for his patent.
The double edged sword of patent protection will continue to bite all of us, but in this particular case, there might be a smidgen of justice. Perhaps there's a nice way to treble the damages....
They don't want to change over their equipment. They haven't eaten the capital costs in transmitters-- where every broadcast station in the US has had to do so. ALL OF THEM HAVE changed over, with a handful of transulator and repeater sites.
EVERYONE in the US has already capitalized the costs of HD cameras, editing equipment, and the rest of the gear that they need.
Not about consumers, eh? Consumers wanted better rasters, and they got them with HD. ATSC tuners can discriminate more than 26 different video levels-- and many can be found for under US$600.
No-- this is about not wanting to do the asset costs. The CBC would LOVE to have a system similar to the UK where there's a tax on every TV, paid periodically, to help them survive and make their expensive productions.
HD has NOTHING to do with advertising-- that's a crappy sales force with a competitively weak product talking. PBS did it, and the CBC can, too.
The underlying concept, be it mobile or cellular hasn't and won't change.
WiFi exists in cells, as does GSM and CDMA. WiMax has both a point-multi-point approach, or point-point. Both exist in cells, logically, physically, and electrically. This ISO/OSI Layer 1-2 approach isn't going to really change for the forseeable future. When it does, I expect another term might be both appropriate and natural.
Mobiles, a term my UK and Asian friends use, is apt. I use it, too, although I'm an American. My German friends use 'handys' as their term. All three are reasonably correct in usage, and intent.
Cellular as a term is entirely apt, and a good name. My truck is when you get some Starbucks-hopped-up marketing people together to try and change things to bend a market towards them, first semantically, then perhaps, genuinely. Fie on that.
I have no issues with anyone that wants to text, watch movies, listen to MP3s, or use their phone as an eating utensil.
In the same way that there are laptops, notebooks, tablets, sub-mini PCs, and so on, I'll presume that the natural tendency of language to embue definition will continue. Sloth dictates that any combination of more than two words-- even compounded-- is unlikely to become popular and therefore succeed.
It was a phone, contrasted by VoIP phone or analog phone. There are wired and wireless phones. There are mobiles, cells, and so on. No device has re-anchored speech sufficiently to alter these basic terms-- yet. The iPod came close, as it seems to have defined a genre of consumer electronics devices. But it's unlikely to become like kleenex/Kleenex, or another trademark now rendered generic. Because of that, and the fact that the entire class of devices has no useful term other than MP3 player (which is a highly constrained term), the push behind the crest of success of the iPod is likely to continue-- it has odd mindshare. As a friend of mine asked me the other day, WTF is a Zune?
They still work by using cells. Americans and a few others call them cell phones, which is appropriate, even when they use them in WiFi or WiMax mode (which are cell-based, after all). The rest of the world calls them everything from mobiles to 'handys' (in Germany).
The name isn't as important as the functionality. And texting is what racks up revenue; there's no data that supports that texting minutes of use exceed voice use. I've been watching for that data for a long time, and so far, it's only texting revenue that's becoming higher in terms of minutes 'online' than voice.
Keep your matches away when he talks.
Although I'll give them credit for a lot of code, good old BSD is the well from whence many operating systems drink.
Given re-invention of code, or code I can 'steal', I'll look at good code and glean the best from it any time. So did Microsoft. So did IBM. So did Novell. It's the sincerest form of flattery, after all.
The NYT also likes to cite 'blogghorea" as well .
There's some truth to this, because bloggers have a "can't get no respect" problem that often gives them an attitude that opposes 'legitimate' journalists. 'Legitimate' journalists, in turn, decry bloggers.
At some point, bloggers are useful and convey good information, if not aligned with both legal and journalistic principles. Now journalists are becoming bloggers, and the distinctions are becoming exceedingly blurred.
What we wanted is truth, or opinion, but clear distinctions between the two, and referential rather than specious information. The quality of both journalists and bloggers is now emerging, and there's a price tag for that quality-- and we're willing to pay for it, because we need the truth, we need opinion, and we need referential integrity.
It's all natural.
After all NASA has done to put satellites into the drink, endanger astronauts, and soak money like LA uses water, you'd think there'd be no embarrassing bugs like this one. Someone needs to be looking for a job flipping burgers.
I can buy no excuse for something as inane as this. No one takes responsibility any more. There's a project manager that needs to fall on his sword. Or get pushed.
It's folly to deny that we're just out of the age of tribal culture, and many of us are still there. Stir in fear, my-god-is-better-than-yours,-heathen, make some insulting commentary, and it's a recipe for explosiveness.
Add in greed, as in oil greed and thirst (it used to be water and arable land) and you get Iraq, as no proof has been forthcoming of any of the reasons we went to war there. Instead, we shot about $3trillion getting revenge for about 3K deaths.... this after we went to war for Kuwait and rubbed out about 300K Iraqis (so far the total to be 650K+ now).
For what? Oil? Some odd sense of Christian honor? For the poor people caught in the WTC buildings? Islam was comparatively quiet until we stuck a stick up the hornets nest. Now Bush has mobilized some large multiplier of people against the US, and the actual values the US stands for, not the greed of oil politics.
Now more soldiers have been killed than at the WTC and Pentagon and Flight 93 combined. We have almost nothing to show for it. Iraq is crumbling, there will be no oil from there for ages at best, and there are the dead Iraqis, the dead misguided Taliban, lots of soldiers from Italy, Denmark, Germany, Poland, Australia, and the US. There is little hope for peace in the region, the financed debt is enormous-- even mindboggling, and I'll admit: we're nature, and as we get smarter, the stakes get higher and higher. Were it a 'natural', not murderous or 'act of manslaughter' we might indeed forget. But add in the human's bruised ego and testosterone, and stand back, open your wallets, and find some clips.
The SCO case taught us the taxonomy of what's inside Linux, and it's protected. Add to this the GNU utilities, also hand-crafted by RMS. Any patents that Microsoft pulls out of its sleeve and sends torts about will be fodder for the EU community to go ballistic about, and worse, hurt Microsoft's chances to make friends with the OSS & F/OSS communities.
No, this is a case of the enemy of my enemy is my cross-licensed friend. This would never happen while Ray Noorda was alive, but alas, he's gone now. It's probably making Eric Schmidt, who once headed Novell, cringe.
It's all for chest thumping. Nothing to see here. Move along.
Nine different acts give the FCC full authority to do what they did in the Massport decision. They start with The Communications Act of 1933, and go forward. Can they intrude? Yes. Have nexus of authority? Without question.
The 2.4ghz band, when used for unlicensed communications, is fully and internationally acknowledged as free and open for legal communications. That amounts to about anything within power limitations. The FCC can and has ruled effectively in this circumstance, and the Massport arguments ought to result in a serious rethinking about who has the ability to 'authorize' unlicensed wireless activities.
The assets deployed for the old tip-and-ring telephony were and are public trusts; protected monopolies for municipal utility use. Telcos have stolen these assets, their incumbent rights-of-way and easements for their own purposes-- shareholder return and equity. This massive theft goes untested and unnoticed.
The low-hanging fruit of public assets-- the big cities-- are easy pickings. High-density infrastructure pays first. Rural areas and marginal density suburban areas pay less and cost more. Gone is the idea that rural deployments can be subsidized because the telcos believe that their depreciation costs are too high to afford subsidizing low-density deployments. The results: the Congress, already in the back pockets of the telcos, has yanked from the states, the authority to regulate the telcos.
The net effect is that the telcos have the ability to hold consumers hostage in this 'free market', where the telcos have consolidated from nine to just four, depending how you count them. Ah, the free market, where 'free' means 'for shareholders'. Flamebait? Look in your heart.
At best, Oracle can start to build their market. To believe the PR spin, you'd think they'd been kernel hackers from say, 1991. In fact, that's not true. While RHEL is competitive, remember that is free-open-source-software, and Oracle makes not a dime from that. Like RH, they'll add services, interesting apps, research, and perhaps a groupie audience with a Fedora-like effort, or that of OpenSUSE.
If you let Oracle achieve their 'marketshare' from thin air, you're doing injustice to hundreds of thousands of coders that have been evolving the kernel, GNU apps, and lots of interesting and useful apps-- that aren't poised strictly to sell a money maker- in this case the Oracle db.
Yes, Oracle has a powerful sales machine, even legendary. That Oracle now deigns fit to 'sanctify' Linux is more of a johnny-come-lately move while MySQL and PGRE eat their lunch. They also face enormous obstacles with IBM and its alliance with SUSE-- especially overseas. Don't let the marketing kiddies fool you.
PPTP uses a hash. It's tough to crack, save very early editions, which were like wet paper.
IPSec VPNs use a seed of some kind (they vary according to the implementation) or use a temporal key.
SSL uses a nice scheme that's difficult to crunch.
NONE OF THEM, however, protect against keyloggers and their variants. If you look at the wire or air with a sniffing device, however, you'll need to have cracked whatever encryption scheme has been implemented. IPSec with a TKIP/RADIUS-based authentication method is pretty tough to break.... unless you have a keylogger someplace or you can dictionary-attack weak stuff.
And so are the MIPS family of processors. So are many of SGI's core businesses, like selling to the TV networks (now it's Apple-to-Avid with new stuff that simply buries SGI), stringing clientele along to the tune of numerous significant digits for incomplete and ill-designed systems.
The fact that they couldn't hold onto employees because their situation was untennable, with so many chiefs and so few worker bees, may now be changed. It's unlikely that their re-emergence from CH11 will do much to save them. Their emporer still has no clothes and is still charging by the pay-per-view model.
I mean, after all, the genome map wasn't built in a day. Tic tac toe is one thing (forget the latency-- it's as bad as my mother) but what would a mass of DNA goo look like that knows how play Quake?
Having trouble clogging those OC192 NAP connections? Need some local cacheing of CONTENT? That's what Google had in mind-- thwart even the nemisis 'net NOT neutrality' issues and just run some fiber to the local fat routers.
Then it doesn't matter if you're pulling YouTube streams in a death march.
QoS jams? Local replication points? Just hook up the old shipping container full of those cute 8-core CPUs and drain the grid. At least they got some press.
The rule of law is wonderful, and it is not absolute.
Of a number of sorely lacking amendments to the US Constitution are one covering ownership of information about one's self (privacy) and another that would prevent politicians from receiving influence (e.g. foreign contributions, contributions from outside of a district-- and a cap on all of them) among a few others. Without these, we have both very creepy wont for privacy and a bribed legislature at all levels.
Drama? Let's see the drama when you look at your Visa bill and find that someone's snatched your identity. Consider further the sheer amount of video that you're currently displacing, unwittingly, most everywhere you shop, and in numerous public places. Just because you have clothes on doesn't mean it's not wrong. There is a deep presumption of innocence that video cameras thwart in the same way that the receipt checker at the bigbox retailers impugn your integrity by asking you for the receipt. Let some of these slip away, these little rights we have, one at a time, and they'll be gone. And those that state that we've already lost them will be proven correct in their forecast. Now, try and get them back-- it's like taxes-- once you put them in, you'll never see a tax go away. At most, they're replaced by something more hideous. Lose a bit of your integrity here, then there, and they add up until it's hard to have the presumption of innocence any more. Fie on your 'drama'.
And what gives them the right, you see? What gives them the right to record your actions or mine? Just the fact that we're walking down the street?
How far must your privacy be abused before you'll cave? Do you want to be your social security/social insurance/whatevergov-id-theywant for ever? Want that number to be abused, misused, stolen, and other havoc wreaked upon you? What is your tolerance for this? When do you start fighting back? When do you say 555-1212 to the serf clerk that asks it, or the cashier that wants your zipcode? What is the information about you worth to you? How shall it be shanghai'd next?
Is it civil disobedience to crunch a camera or vandalism? I say civil disobedience. Fine me either way. Catch me, first..... that's if you have any cameras left.
Each day I walk out and flip my social finger in the sky. One day, Google Maps will find me, and my act of defiance will be noted in some god-forsaken NSA computer. My address will be found and scheduled for intervention by the thought police, the ones hired by the people that told you of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and other lies. I don't trust them, and I don't believe they have a right to follow me and my affairs. And to my European friends that let cameras monitor every single move they make-- you're already sunk.
If one simply traipses over to MediaMatters.Org, or any of a number of media-watching sites, it takes no rocket science to understand that less privacy=more profits. And as profits are above all, including morality, they must reign, or so we are told.
And as all of the minimum wage serfs sneer at you when they as you for your phone number when you in for a hair trim, it becomes increasingly impossible to remain anonymous, private in one's own affairs, and free from the scrutiny of the self-righteous. Somehow, I must live their concept of the path to Heaven, and deviation is, well, deviant.
So: kick the cameras when you find them. Put a little hood on them and beat them with a hammer. Cut coax. Re-address IP cams to porn feeds. Put chewing gum in appropriate places. Part of freedom is freedom from scrutiny. Burn the man; hack the system . One this is clear: live free or die isn't just for New Hampshire license plates-- you have to live it or surrender it.
Think about it: Cisco going after their biggest customers-- Verizon, AT&T, Deutsche Telekom, Comcast, TW/Brighthouse?
Nope. Not going to happen. And therefore, despite the fact that this patent needs to be thrown out on its ass, it's useless to even have the first tiny tort sent. It's a nihilistic sort of patent to start with....