There might be some problems with putting it in paper:
1. Module has to stay in the paper. This is harder than it sounds. 2. Antenna (for contactless) has to be much thinner and more flexible than paper. Many transit systems using microcontrollers embedded inside tickets might already have this, but the paper is pretty thick. 3. Antenna has to stay in the paper. 4. Paper tracking can be done already with UV inks. I'm not sure which would be cheaper though.
Does anyone know what kind of microcontroller is used on the transit system tickets?
If you really didn't like your situation, you wouldn't be in it. So, the way out is as follows:
1. Live below your means 2. Take control of your life!
Everyone, and I mean everyone serves somebody. So, that part will never change. But if you live below your means, then you make many more choices available for yourself.
In this situation, the people at the EFF are doing #2 and they are doing it using the tools the system provides. Please use the EFF as a source for inspiration.
they apparently have decided they can't prove that the NSA is breaking any laws
That is so true it's positively funny!
EFF: Yes, we'd like your records concerning domestic spying NSA: No. EFF: Why not? NSA: I can't tell you. EFF: Your honor, I demand the records be released! Judge: It's a secret. Judge: Case dismissed on lack of evidence!
There's nothing illegal about what they are doing!
According to the Bush Administration, no crime has been committed. So, no criminal offense. If it's ever substantially evaluated by the Courts or Congress I'd be very surprised.
Whether or not that is correct is beyond my level of interest, as executive office authorized domestic spying is simply the tip of a proverbial iceberg that's been going along quite well all by itself.
I still do not understand why/.'ers get so upset at all of this.
Obviously, the judgement even if they win would not be such that it puts them out of business. There are so many examples of this in recent history I'm surprised to see a comment like this.
-"asbestos settlement" on google will get you plenty of examples. -"Exxon Valdez" is another one. -"tobacco settlement"
Even if they got a big number, they tie the judgement up in court for decades, negotiate down the settlement or any one of a million other options.
Lastly, the "big number" that Media corps publish basically qwell citizen revolt. It looks like something is being done. Actual penalties are big fractions of the published numbers (1/2-1/10) minus other accounting maneuvers.
Sure taking on AT&T looks great and gets you a lot of press
That's the most positive outcome they can have in almost any situation. The minimum purpose then, it to raise awareness of the issue and promote the EFF.
Go after the bottom of the food chain How would they discover the illicit activity at the smaller telcos? Either way they get laughed at by the big telcos. They want to fight the big guys, so let them! If anything it teaches them what it takes to win. This is a classic problem in sports. If an athlete does not play outside their comfort/skill set, they stand much less of a chance at getting better. I think it's very safe to say the right hand doesn't know what the left is doing at ATT. Even in the legal department.
There are some very poor people living in Inglewood, CA
I agree they don't live in perfect conditions. My sister teaches in Inglewood, so I've heard her stories. That's as difficult and intractable a problem as poverty in developing nations.
Giving computers to poor people who need computers doesn't preclude giving water purifiers to people who need them.
Yes it does. The funds for developing nations are finite. I would choose water filters over a laptop any day.
USD$4000 would go quite far in providing teachers and supplies in developing nations.
Worldbank.org stats make some interesting reading... Let's see what $4000 would buy using their Gross National Income figures with the very handy PPP calculation already figured in...
low income country $0-$825 59 countries (at least 4 teachers) lower middle income, $826 - $3,255 54 countries (at least 1 teacher) $3,256 - $10,065 upper middle income 40 countries (maybe 1 teacher) $10,066 or more high income 55 countries (no teachers)
This data suggests that if I spend the money on teachers, the poorest of the poor benefit the most! If you assume 40 students in a class, that means AT LEAST 160 MORE children are educated in the poorest of the poor nations, 40 in low middle income, etc.
If I spend it on laptops, rich or poor the $4000 only buys 40 laptops. If I were King of the World, I would choose educating 160 more kids every year over a laptop.
I do agree that access to books would be the best application and an excellent use for the laptop. Excellent point.
But the rest of it seems very much like the fruitless rush to computerize American classrooms from years ago.
You are assuming that empowering and educating requires a computer. It does not.
You are assuming that the computer is somehow critical in the educational process when the opposite can be argued quite effectively.
Would training the unwashed masses to use computers for the year 2020 Call Center staff raise the living standards in a country? I don't have a good answer either way...
It's good for the project to get the thumbs up from the U.N. but I have alot of difficulty with the overall concept of delivering technology to populations that are having trouble getting their basic biological needs met.
Maybe they have the food/water/basic education working but widespread corruption keeps the country poor. Do you see where I'm going? How is this computer going to eliminate pervasive political/social problems or otherwise redistribute wealth?
All of the boot-strapping capitalists will flame me for "denying others the opportunity to...." That would be avoiding my question.
You are assuming that they will actually have to pay that fine.
The procedure is as follows:
1: Publish big number to qwell citizen revolt 2: Negotiate lower settlement over the next few months 3: Profit!
Case in point: Exxon Valdez(sp?) Oil Spill 1: Exxon get Billion(!!) dollar fine 2: Exxon negotiates Billion dollar fine over umpteen years 3: Exxon pays less than 1/2 the published number in real dollars.
Choicepoint would cry like babies and threaten bankruptcy which they probably are doing anyway. "But Senator/Congressperson, consumer privacy is important. But think of all the lost jobs if ChoicePoint were to declare bankruptcy!!!"
This example highlights how institutions (gov't corps) long ago superceded the individual in terms of credibility on an unconcious level. Oracle today, Cisco a few months ago. Years ago there was a guy doing research on censorware. I recall that guy maintains he's a "victim" of the DMCA. You need more proof? All the moral outrage about this guy on/. and no action. Nothing.
Just one lesson to learn here is there needs to be some kind of standard procedure for notifying and working with companies with flawed software.
The idea being the individual conforms to a SOP and if the corporation hasn't done their part at some point, then the flaw can be responsibly published. It would give more strength and accountability to individuals. Much in the way a medical doctors use SOP's to indemnify themselves in malpractice situations.
Is there anything like it out there for security research?
Portable devices that do many things don't ever do very well in the marketplace. Look at the PDA or the market for the "universal remote control."
The jury is still out on whether or not a video iPod will be successful. That's about as close to multifunction as people will put up with. Please don't provide Apple's video downloads as proof of "success". Most people will try something a few times and it's tough to argue we've passed through the try-out stage yet.
I would love to hear from people in other parts of the world if all-in-one devices are more desirable than single purpose devices.
To me this just reflects a deep distrust of Richard Stallman As multiple posts point out, it's more to do with the licensing minutae then a some kind of relational "trust" problem. I'm not sure where you get that, but please re-consider the facts.
and his social agenda. His "social agenda" is at the very least partially responsible for the loads of free software and **innovation** in the computing industry. If you don't agree with his views, then there's lots of commercial software vendors with proprietary software waiting for you to buy....he's resorting to tyranny where his past attempts to win hearts and minds have failed. Really? Failed? I've got at least three great production-class operating systems built on the Linux kernel serving pages for a big part of the Internet. (Debian, Slackware and your favorite distro)
I respect anyone who can disagree with an opinion/belief responsibly. Casting Mr. Stallman as a tyrant with a "social agenda" (damn hippie!) is flat-out propaganda and grossly irresponsible.
We have a wonderful freedom to vocally disagree in America. I just wish you and others would take that responsibility more seriously. Please consider your opinions more carefully before hitting the "submit" button.
I personally made a very foolish mistake in college by attending a less prestigious school over a much more prestigious one.
I paid my way through university. At the time I was furious that they were teaching me things I had learned in community college. Same text books, similar lectures, only the professors would blather on about their research which had little to do with the subject of the day.
So I left. I felt I got a better education, but boy it doesn't show on paper. To this day I think I would have gotten better career opportunities (at least an interview) by sticking with that horrible school.
Knowledge is free. The school name on the diploma most certainly is not.
Every time someone uses that phrase it makes the implausible sound within reality's grasp.
Offer to split the difference between your pay and the billing rate, and take the business back from the non-productive opportunists.
What about the ethical compromise? Screw the middleman that got you the job for a few extra bucks.... How about rewarding the guy that got you the work so he'll get you another one? How about one guy spends all his time bringing customers in the front door so you can perform your service? It's called specialization and history shows it is a likely path to creating wealth.
I know you can do it and I've personally witnessed this cutting out the middleman bit. But a middleman is there for many powerful reasons.
You have a good point, but you are discounting the enormous complexity required to build a desktop OS/system. This requires a longer range view which translates into some patience unless you've got the "right" hardware.
Look at it from a different angle, *nixes are replacing important back-end systems these days. This is a different kind of complexity than a desktop, but it's happening and the future looks bright. Next is the desktop.
That's going to take a long time. By then many of you will probably have moved onto the next OS anyway because it will be more interesting.
Unfortunately, "free" carries a negative connotation in the business world: worthless.
The smart thing to do is charge a f*sking fortune for something that is free. Make it a status symbol/exclusive/BS. The well-known red hat and IBM are perfect examples.
Sounds crazy, but it's true. As you understand Linux is an **unbelievable** value for the SMB. Lack of cheap MCSA's makes "free" sound like a whole lot of trouble.
Related story: I've got the small company I work for running linux for some things. My boss (Not a PHB) *still* does not want to convert the Windows file server that requires way more baby sitting than the busier linux box. It's only a file server for gosh sake!
Call me crazy, but I read a bunch of false assumptions into the summary.
1. "make their own player" e.g. hardware No, they wouldn't make their own. They would license an OEM product at relatively little cost to Microsoft. The DRM/WMP (big-money investment) is done, the actual "player" is commodity hardware. Connecting it to WMP can't be so much work.
2. "make their own player" e.g. market strategy I don't follow it so closely but I imagine there are quite a few Microsoft MP3 DRM licensees. That doesn't stop Microsoft from actually marketing a player, but I have a feeling they are trying to out-commoditize Apple. Commoditizing is what Microsoft knows how to do.
3. Apple's "Fair Play" Is it available to anyone who wants to make an mp3 player? Last time I checked HP got the whole package from Apple. Apple's style tends to include everything, not just the DRM part. Different platforms is definitely a different case (cell phones) but for an "mp3 player" I doubt Apple is dying to play the compete against fellow licensees who offer their device at a lower price game. It's *never* worked for them.
I'm sure Microsoft will try to compete more effectively with Apple, as someone with some OEM experience, I don't see it happening quite the way the article tries to make it seem.
Everyone of you that live in fear of a national ID might tell me that whatever agency gets to build the thing will share with any agency that comes calling? Simple human nature tells me this won't happen. No sharing of information, no real substantial coordination between agencies. Nothing.
I am concerned that centralizing law enforcement authority will be a more desirable outcome of the legislation, with no intention of ever actually issuing an ID card.
There are quite a number of commercial information agencies many of which have gov't contracts for your personal data. Let's not forget the latest revelation regarding GWB's authorizing domestic survielance without any oversight.
Your detailed personal activity is already being collected. Many of you are up in arms because they want to issue a national ID????! It's water under the bridge. Done.
This guy http://www.identityblog.com/ (warning microsoftie) has the same hue and cry about privacy and yet the guy is advocating a system to collect far more detailed activity in a more revocable/authenticatable manner (whatever that means) than what's available now. I asked him to clarify his stance in comments to his blog. Surprise! Neither was the comment posted nor a response given.
Because it easily morphs (if it hasn't already) into a group that gov't can "trust" to advise them how to write legislation, tell them what corp's feel should be in related legislation and more dark and dangerous things.
Let's assume that this federation is around for a little while. Sooner rather than later, it's not just about spyware.
Trusted Computing + DRM + "spyware federation" - net anonymity = sh*t pipe into your home.
Slashdot Mirror
There might be some problems with putting it in paper:
1. Module has to stay in the paper. This is harder than it sounds.
2. Antenna (for contactless) has to be much thinner and more flexible than paper. Many transit systems using microcontrollers embedded inside tickets might already have this, but the paper is pretty thick.
3. Antenna has to stay in the paper.
4. Paper tracking can be done already with UV inks. I'm not sure which would be cheaper though.
Does anyone know what kind of microcontroller is used on the transit system tickets?
I have to believe this is how the mighty want to do things as well.
The Trusted Computing system relies on the notion that "security" processes are done on another processor.
to what you were saying.
If you really didn't like your situation, you wouldn't be in it. So, the way out is as follows:
1. Live below your means
2. Take control of your life!
Everyone, and I mean everyone serves somebody. So, that part will never change. But if you live below your means, then you make many more choices available for yourself.
In this situation, the people at the EFF are doing #2 and they are doing it using the tools the system provides. Please use the EFF as a source for inspiration.
It's a very favorable legal status in America.
. _Southern_Pacific_Railroad
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_personhood
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Clara_County_v
they apparently have decided they can't prove that the NSA is breaking any laws
That is so true it's positively funny!
EFF: Yes, we'd like your records concerning domestic spying
NSA: No.
EFF: Why not?
NSA: I can't tell you.
EFF: Your honor, I demand the records be released!
Judge: It's a secret.
Judge: Case dismissed on lack of evidence!
There's nothing illegal about what they are doing!
/.'ers get so upset at all of this.
According to the Bush Administration, no crime has been committed. So, no criminal offense. If it's ever substantially evaluated by the Courts or Congress I'd be very surprised.
Whether or not that is correct is beyond my level of interest, as executive office authorized domestic spying is simply the tip of a proverbial iceberg that's been going along quite well all by itself.
I still do not understand why
and the courts know better anyway.
Obviously, the judgement even if they win would not be such that it puts them out of business. There are so many examples of this in recent history I'm surprised to see a comment like this.
-"asbestos settlement" on google will get you plenty of examples.
-"Exxon Valdez" is another one.
-"tobacco settlement"
Even if they got a big number, they tie the judgement up in court for decades, negotiate down the settlement or any one of a million other options.
Lastly, the "big number" that Media corps publish basically qwell citizen revolt. It looks like something is being done. Actual penalties are big fractions of the published numbers (1/2-1/10) minus other accounting maneuvers.
Sure taking on AT&T looks great and gets you a lot of press
That's the most positive outcome they can have in almost any situation. The minimum purpose then, it to raise awareness of the issue and promote the EFF.
Go after the bottom of the food chain
How would they discover the illicit activity at the smaller telcos? Either way they get laughed at by the big telcos.
They want to fight the big guys, so let them! If anything it teaches them what it takes to win. This is a classic problem in sports. If an athlete does not play outside their comfort/skill set, they stand much less of a chance at getting better.
I think it's very safe to say the right hand doesn't know what the left is doing at ATT. Even in the legal department.
Widipedia has a nice summary of the alternative DNS roots.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_DNS_root
There are some very poor people living in Inglewood, CA
I agree they don't live in perfect conditions. My sister teaches in Inglewood, so I've heard her stories. That's as difficult and intractable a problem as poverty in developing nations.
Giving computers to poor people who need computers doesn't preclude giving water purifiers to people who need them.
Yes it does. The funds for developing nations are finite. I would choose water filters over a laptop any day.
USD$4000 would go quite far in providing teachers and supplies in developing nations.
I STICS/0,,contentMDK:20420458~menuPK:64133156~pageP K:64133150~piPK:64133175~theSitePK:239419,00.html
Worldbank.org stats make some interesting reading...
Let's see what $4000 would buy using their Gross National Income figures with the very handy PPP calculation already figured in...
low income country $0-$825 59 countries (at least 4 teachers)
lower middle income, $826 - $3,255 54 countries (at least 1 teacher)
$3,256 - $10,065 upper middle income 40 countries (maybe 1 teacher)
$10,066 or more high income 55 countries (no teachers)
http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/DATASTAT
This data suggests that if I spend the money on teachers, the poorest of the poor benefit the most! If you assume 40 students in a class, that means AT LEAST 160 MORE children are educated in the poorest of the poor nations, 40 in low middle income, etc.
If I spend it on laptops, rich or poor the $4000 only buys 40 laptops. If I were King of the World, I would choose educating 160 more kids every year over a laptop.
I do agree that access to books would be the best application and an excellent use for the laptop. Excellent point.
But the rest of it seems very much like the fruitless rush to computerize American classrooms from years ago.
You are assuming that empowering and educating requires a computer. It does not.
You are assuming that the computer is somehow critical in the educational process when the opposite can be argued quite effectively.
Would training the unwashed masses to use computers for the year 2020 Call Center staff raise the living standards in a country? I don't have a good answer either way...
Check that phrase otherwise redistribute wealth? The quickie-mart capitalists will flame me for that.
It should read otherwise create wealth.
It's good for the project to get the thumbs up from the U.N. but I have alot of difficulty with the overall concept of delivering technology to populations that are having trouble getting their basic biological needs met.
Maybe they have the food/water/basic education working but widespread corruption keeps the country poor. Do you see where I'm going? How is this computer going to eliminate pervasive political/social problems or otherwise redistribute wealth?
All of the boot-strapping capitalists will flame me for "denying others the opportunity to...." That would be avoiding my question.
You are assuming that they will actually have to pay that fine.
The procedure is as follows:
1: Publish big number to qwell citizen revolt
2: Negotiate lower settlement over the next few months
3: Profit!
Case in point: Exxon Valdez(sp?) Oil Spill
1: Exxon get Billion(!!) dollar fine
2: Exxon negotiates Billion dollar fine over umpteen years
3: Exxon pays less than 1/2 the published number in real dollars.
Choicepoint would cry like babies and threaten bankruptcy which they probably are doing anyway. "But Senator/Congressperson, consumer privacy is important. But think of all the lost jobs if ChoicePoint were to declare bankruptcy!!!"
This example highlights how institutions (gov't corps) long ago superceded the individual in terms of credibility on an unconcious level. Oracle today, Cisco a few months ago. Years ago there was a guy doing research on censorware. I recall that guy maintains he's a "victim" of the DMCA. You need more proof? All the moral outrage about this guy on /. and no action. Nothing.
Just one lesson to learn here is there needs to be some kind of standard procedure for notifying and working with companies with flawed software.
The idea being the individual conforms to a SOP and if the corporation hasn't done their part at some point, then the flaw can be responsibly published. It would give more strength and accountability to individuals. Much in the way a medical doctors use SOP's to indemnify themselves in malpractice situations.
Is there anything like it out there for security research?
Portable devices that do many things don't ever do very well in the marketplace. Look at the PDA or the market for the "universal remote control."
The jury is still out on whether or not a video iPod will be successful. That's about as close to multifunction as people will put up with. Please don't provide Apple's video downloads as proof of "success". Most people will try something a few times and it's tough to argue we've passed through the try-out stage yet.
I would love to hear from people in other parts of the world if all-in-one devices are more desirable than single purpose devices.
To me this just reflects a deep distrust of Richard Stallman
...he's resorting to tyranny where his past attempts to win hearts and minds have failed.
As multiple posts point out, it's more to do with the licensing minutae then a some kind of relational "trust" problem. I'm not sure where you get that, but please re-consider the facts.
and his social agenda.
His "social agenda" is at the very least partially responsible for the loads of free software and **innovation** in the computing industry. If you don't agree with his views, then there's lots of commercial software vendors with proprietary software waiting for you to buy.
Really? Failed? I've got at least three great production-class operating systems built on the Linux kernel serving pages for a big part of the Internet. (Debian, Slackware and your favorite distro)
I respect anyone who can disagree with an opinion/belief responsibly. Casting Mr. Stallman as a tyrant with a "social agenda" (damn hippie!) is flat-out propaganda and grossly irresponsible.
We have a wonderful freedom to vocally disagree in America. I just wish you and others would take that responsibility more seriously. Please consider your opinions more carefully before hitting the "submit" button.
This is wisdom of the ages friends.
I personally made a very foolish mistake in college by attending a less prestigious school over a much more prestigious one.
I paid my way through university. At the time I was furious that they were teaching me things I had learned in community college. Same text books, similar lectures, only the professors would blather on about their research which had little to do with the subject of the day.
So I left. I felt I got a better education, but boy it doesn't show on paper. To this day I think I would have gotten better career opportunities (at least an interview) by sticking with that horrible school.
Knowledge is free. The school name on the diploma most certainly is not.
Every time someone uses that phrase it makes the implausible sound within reality's grasp.
Offer to split the difference between your pay and the billing rate, and take the business back from the non-productive opportunists.
What about the ethical compromise? Screw the middleman that got you the job for a few extra bucks.... How about rewarding the guy that got you the work so he'll get you another one? How about one guy spends all his time bringing customers in the front door so you can perform your service? It's called specialization and history shows it is a likely path to creating wealth.
I know you can do it and I've personally witnessed this cutting out the middleman bit. But a middleman is there for many powerful reasons.
You have a good point, but you are discounting the enormous complexity required to build a desktop OS/system. This requires a longer range view which translates into some patience unless you've got the "right" hardware.
Look at it from a different angle, *nixes are replacing important back-end systems these days. This is a different kind of complexity than a desktop, but it's happening and the future looks bright. Next is the desktop.
That's going to take a long time. By then many of you will probably have moved onto the next OS anyway because it will be more interesting.
Unfortunately, "free" carries a negative connotation in the business world: worthless.
The smart thing to do is charge a f*sking fortune for something that is free. Make it a status symbol/exclusive/BS. The well-known red hat and IBM are perfect examples.
Sounds crazy, but it's true. As you understand Linux is an **unbelievable** value for the SMB. Lack of cheap MCSA's makes "free" sound like a whole lot of trouble.
Related story: I've got the small company I work for running linux for some things. My boss (Not a PHB) *still* does not want to convert the Windows file server that requires way more baby sitting than the busier linux box. It's only a file server for gosh sake!
Call me crazy, but I read a bunch of false assumptions into the summary.
1. "make their own player" e.g. hardware
No, they wouldn't make their own. They would license an OEM product at relatively little cost to Microsoft. The DRM/WMP (big-money investment) is done, the actual "player" is commodity hardware. Connecting it to WMP can't be so much work.
2. "make their own player" e.g. market strategy
I don't follow it so closely but I imagine there are quite a few Microsoft MP3 DRM licensees. That doesn't stop Microsoft from actually marketing a player, but I have a feeling they are trying to out-commoditize Apple. Commoditizing is what Microsoft knows how to do.
3. Apple's "Fair Play"
Is it available to anyone who wants to make an mp3 player? Last time I checked HP got the whole package from Apple. Apple's style tends to include everything, not just the DRM part. Different platforms is definitely a different case (cell phones) but for an "mp3 player" I doubt Apple is dying to play the compete against fellow licensees who offer their device at a lower price game. It's *never* worked for them.
I'm sure Microsoft will try to compete more effectively with Apple, as someone with some OEM experience, I don't see it happening quite the way the article tries to make it seem.
Think about this for a minute.
Everyone of you that live in fear of a national ID might tell me that whatever agency gets to build the thing will share with any agency that comes calling? Simple human nature tells me this won't happen. No sharing of information, no real substantial coordination between agencies. Nothing.
I am concerned that centralizing law enforcement authority will be a more desirable outcome of the legislation, with no intention of ever actually issuing an ID card.
There are quite a number of commercial information agencies many of which have gov't contracts for your personal data. Let's not forget the latest revelation regarding GWB's authorizing domestic survielance without any oversight.
Your detailed personal activity is already being collected. Many of you are up in arms because they want to issue a national ID????! It's water under the bridge. Done.
This guy http://www.identityblog.com/ (warning microsoftie) has the same hue and cry about privacy and yet the guy is advocating a system to collect far more detailed activity in a more revocable/authenticatable manner (whatever that means) than what's available now. I asked him to clarify his stance in comments to his blog. Surprise! Neither was the comment posted nor a response given.
A national ID card won't change a thing.
Because it easily morphs (if it hasn't already) into a group that gov't can "trust" to advise them how to write legislation, tell them what corp's feel should be in related legislation and more dark and dangerous things.
Let's assume that this federation is around for a little while. Sooner rather than later, it's not just about spyware.
Trusted Computing + DRM + "spyware federation" - net anonymity = sh*t pipe into your home.