So let me get this straight: You want help circumventing the laws of a nation you intend to visit. And this isn't just any nation, but a nation where it's not unheard of for dissidents to be dealt with via a bullet to the head.
I'm trying to figure out just what combination of arrogance, foolishness, and pr0n addiction made you even consider this.
When in Rome, do as the Romans. Or just stay the hell out of Rome.
It's a legitimate concern, and I'd be seriously worried if Firefox weren't under the Mozilla license. There's already been some precedent established for the kind of arrangement you're proposing where a corporate sponsor attempted to twist the Mozilla codebase for its own benefit, and it didn't work out. Remember Netscape Navigator? Know anybody who uses it?
The great thing about free open source software is that the developers can be kept in line with the prospect of competing with their own project. If you take the project in a direction that pisses off enough people, they can swoop in, fork your code, and beat you over the head with it. The very existence of projects like Kmeleon makes the corruption tactic a high risk maneuver.
It's not that it's being exploited by genius so much as it was implemented by arrogance. The very nature of DRM software is to conspire with a content provider to use Joe User's computer against him in a way that he cannot circumvent.
Any DRM implementation is more likely to be exploitable in ways such as this. DRM is more likely to be insecure from the user's standpoint because it's designed from the ground up with somebody else's security as the highest priority. And once the software has been exploited, it has the potential to be highly troublesome because the malicious code now has access to a system that was designed to prevent the owner of the computer from tampering with it. The more effective the DRM is, the more dangerous it is to the user.
Perhaps I'm being overly paranoid, but I find this to be quite alarming.
If you're incompetent enough that overcoming the consequences of that incompetence is considered an act of heroism, then you really need to find another line of work.
Actually, people downloading movies guarantees he'll be employed for life.
Some time back, I said I'd never work for a company that makes such DRM systems due to ethical concerns. Now I realize that the whole thing is a beautiful scheme to constantly get paid by the movie industry to do what they've been told many times over is impossible.
It's like being hired to build a perpetual motion machine. But each version is more expensive than the last and runs for less time before stopping. And they keep hiring the same people to make new ones.
John Weiner, Milker of the MPAA and Designer of Minimally More Effective DRM, we salute you!
It won't. DRM is not about stopping piracy. It's about the content providers wanting to dictate to the consumer where, when, and how the media will be consumed.
In addition, it will not prevent "personal piracy." DRM will only prevent law-abiding people from exercising their fair use rights. People who wish to defy the law will simply download the movie, which will be ripped and available online in unencrypted form long before the first encrypted HD-DVD copy has been pressed.
The Slashdot editors have been paid by AMDs marketing department to insert these non sequiturs as part of an experimental advertising technique. Personally, I'd never heard of AMD's Alchemy chipset until I read about what a terrible job they were doing marketing it.
Future/. posting: "Several critical IE vulnerabilities were announced this week. With the tech media focused on this, it's going to be impossible for the folks at Mozilla to get the word out about the latest Firefox release."
IANAL, but This recent story seems to contradict your claim. From the article:
Desir pleaded guilty to a three-count felony that charged him with copyright infringement and conspiracy to commit copyright infringement. Desir will face a maximum sentence of 15 years in prison when he is sentenced on March 18, 2005/
This is from the Loki FAQ:
Is this site legal?
Absolutely! This site is merely a tracker. No actual files are hosted on this site and as such, this tracker and its members and owners have absolutely no way of checking what people are sharing - it merely tracks the hash ID and the IP addresses of users connected to each particular torrent. It is your responsibility to check that the content of the files which you download are legal in your locality.
If they're running a tracker, they're toast. The plaintiff's lawyers will just have to do a search and replace on the Napster case, and most of the work is done for them.
My understanding is that one of the main things keeping Grokster out of the fire is the fact that it's a decentralized network. In such a network, the makes of the software don't have any control over what's on the network. BitTorrent is centralized, and the above claim that they have no way of checking what people are sharing is bunk. Donating to their defense is a waste of money.
Say to him "No, rude would be if I told you to go get stuffed, like I'm about to do." You are using the code in a manner that isn't just permmited by the license, it's intended by the license.
I'm sick and tired of these fairweather open source developers. They're all for it when it means they can get a jumpstart on their project using freely available code and not have to ask permission. They're all for it when it means they look at what others have done for inspiration. They're all for it when it means they can attract more developers with the promise that their code won't be locked away to wither and rot so long as someone, anyone is interested in it. But once someone starts using it in a manner they don't approve of, they're up in arms.
Hey, that's the GPL. If it's all his code, he can stop releasing it under the GPL and use a more restrictive license. Otherwise, tell that arrogant bastard he needs to look down on all the GPL shoulders he's standing on and rethink his position.
Phone number, address and SSN? What parent doesn't have all of that info about his/her children, living or dead? So if I had an account with your ISP, my parents could access my email? That's really freaking reassuring.
I have all of that info for my former landlord. She filed for bankruptcy. Since we had to give her a deposit to rent the apartment, we were on her list of "unsecured creditors." The court sent us copies of docuements relating to the proceedings that included plenty of personal info, including her SSN.
Repeat after me: A Social Security Number is not an authentication key.
If Half-Life 2 is an indicator of what's to come, I'll stick with the status quo, thank you very much.
I'm required to log in to their servers every time I play the game. I can block Steam from using the network (ZoneAlarm is our friend), but after a few sessions in offline mode the software tells me that I won't be able to play again until it's able to reconnect to the servers. And in exchange for a system that costs less to distribute and reduces piracy, you'd think I'd get a discount on the game? Nope.
I am a legimitate user, and I have a strong desire to circumvent their protection mechanism. That's a very bad sign. Of course, I've validated their business model by buy^H^H^Hlicensing the game, but I won't make that mistake again for Half-Life 3.
Perhaps I'm being paranoid, but this seems like a coverup for more nefarious intents.
How many bad guys are really caught by monitoring everything out there and trying to filter out what's relevant? In the past, were they scanning every piece of mail, listening to every phone call, inspecting every bank account's purchase records, etc.? Why the sudden panic about not being able to monitor everything? They've never been able to monitor everything. But the "dark alley" argument is a great way to argue for more spy powers, isn't it?
Personally, I'd be surprised if postal mail weren't still the most popular method. No wiretaps, no log files, no drafts saved locally, and all it takes is a match to cover your tracks.
I've found that weaning people off IE is a lot like breaking a chemical addiction: most people don't want to change until they've hit rock bottom. Luckily for me, all the spyware out there makes rock bottom more accessible than ever.
My girlfriend became a Firefox convert after I walked her through removing a serious spyware infection. She has both IE and FireFox icons on her desktop, and she always chooses the right one. She's even starting to warm up to OpenOffice. She still insists on running with admin privileges, though. *Sigh.*
First, you assume Microsoft has any fear whatsoever that the government will be willing and able to effectively bring anti-trust law to bear to restrain its practices. I have yet to see any evidence that Microsoft has pro-actively adjusted its business practices to avoid anti-trust actions. History has shown it's more profitable for them to settle things in the courts.
Second, they would have a monetary motivation to make windows only as secure as it absolutely has to be (which isn't very secure; Microsoft holds a monopoly) in order to increase the incentives for people to buy additional security software. And competing security software will always be behind because MS' team will have direct access to the code and forewarning of any changes to Windows.
$10/hour is pretty bad. Back when I was unemployed, I found plenty of similar offers for programming work. Usually such wages are indicative of company that either doesn't need/want highly skilled workers.
A local church offered me $12/hour to do IT work. The woman I spoke to was apologetic for the low wage, but she said there'd be fresh cookies and lemonade.
Day laborers get $15/hour around here.
A couple of friends of mine made $20/hour cleaning houses when they couldn't find programming work.
I could do algebra tutoring for $20/hour (my girlfriend is doing this now).
Freelance spyware removal can get you $25-$50/hour, depending on how well you hustle.
There are so many other things I'd do besides programming if the only coding job I could find paid $10/hour.
Yes, I realized that the illegal drug trade was the other industry begin referred to. I just think it's a fairly specious connection to make. Implying IT is like drug dealing because both sets of customers are labeled similarly seems silly.
At least try to work some humor in there somewhere: There are two industries where all of the clients are assholes. Proctology is one of them.
And I'm sure there'd be plenty of screaming, if Apple were a monopoly, and if it were actually preventing other vendors' music from playing on the iPod. I've got 1100 songs on my iPod, and I've never bought track from iTunes.
There are plenty of music players on the market, and plenty of options for buying music. Real could have every single one of its songs working on every iPod in the planet very easily if they simply dumped their DRM scheme. Problem solved. But they're trying to hack a competitor's proprietary system so that they can get their own proprietary system to work with it. That's bound to fail. Systems change, software gets updated, and eventual incompatibilities are almost guaranteed.
I own an iPod. And it's still just as functional as it was the day I got it. Near as I can tell, Apple is no closer to having an "Apple-approved-music-only" device than it was when it launched the iPod.
I've seen a half hour of dreck appear before movies, but only on certain showings of really big name movies. It happened when I went to the midnight showing of Fellowship of the Ring.
The lights went down promptly at midnight, and people applauded. And then the ads started. It was terrible. They weren't doing 30 second spots. These were commercials that went on for several minutes. It was like they somehow fused the DNA from an infomercial, a music video and a really boring SNL sketch. After a few extended-edition commercials, I checked my watch. Twelve past midnight. I checked again when the movie actually started, almost exactly at 12:30AM.
The fun part was the whole place was filled with fanatics who really wanted to see the movie, so many of us in the audience entertained ourselves by heckling the commercials. Nobody seemed to mind. My favorite: during an overly long commerical for cell phones, somebody shouted, "Why don't you call someone who cares?"
But I've never seen anything that bad during a movie during normal hours. At the theater I usually attend, it's almost always 15 minutes of commercials and previews before the movie.
People in the U.S. get pissed off about a lot of things. But we're allowed to be pissed about them. People get pissed about the Confederate flag (and I'm one of those people) but if you want to put one up in your front yard, stick a decal on your car, or tattoo it on your forehead, you're still allowed to do so. I'll point and laugh at you, but men with guns and uniforms aren't going to show up to stop you.
People getting pissed off about a game isn't the issue. The issue is government censorship.
I don't know about the rest of corporate America, but it's easy to see why this is the case with programmers. It's quite common for an interviewer to say, "Write a function that does foo." I have never heard an interviewer say, "OK, now document it."
I am Jack's disposable income.
I am what's left over after Jack spends money on things like food, shelter, taxes, and broadband.
You get to see me when you make Jack happy by giving him things like computer games, whisky, and lap dances.
When Jack gets pissed off, he hides me and you don't get to see me.
The (DHTML/CSS?) pops that flow over text perplex me. Do advertisers think that we're blocking popups accidentally?
As Tyler might say: "We've created generation of web users annoyed by popups. I'm wondering if another popup is the answer we really need."
Slashdot Mirror
So let me get this straight: You want help circumventing the laws of a nation you intend to visit. And this isn't just any nation, but a nation where it's not unheard of for dissidents to be dealt with via a bullet to the head. I'm trying to figure out just what combination of arrogance, foolishness, and pr0n addiction made you even consider this.
When in Rome, do as the Romans. Or just stay the hell out of Rome.
It's a legitimate concern, and I'd be seriously worried if Firefox weren't under the Mozilla license. There's already been some precedent established for the kind of arrangement you're proposing where a corporate sponsor attempted to twist the Mozilla codebase for its own benefit, and it didn't work out. Remember Netscape Navigator? Know anybody who uses it?
The great thing about free open source software is that the developers can be kept in line with the prospect of competing with their own project. If you take the project in a direction that pisses off enough people, they can swoop in, fork your code, and beat you over the head with it. The very existence of projects like Kmeleon makes the corruption tactic a high risk maneuver.
Very few people slice their own bread today. Rather, it typically comes presliced from the store.
Wow! That's gotta be the greatest idea since...since...
Dammmit.
It's not that it's being exploited by genius so much as it was implemented by arrogance. The very nature of DRM software is to conspire with a content provider to use Joe User's computer against him in a way that he cannot circumvent.
Any DRM implementation is more likely to be exploitable in ways such as this. DRM is more likely to be insecure from the user's standpoint because it's designed from the ground up with somebody else's security as the highest priority. And once the software has been exploited, it has the potential to be highly troublesome because the malicious code now has access to a system that was designed to prevent the owner of the computer from tampering with it. The more effective the DRM is, the more dangerous it is to the user.
Perhaps I'm being overly paranoid, but I find this to be quite alarming.
This guy screwed up, period.
If you're incompetent enough that overcoming the consequences of that incompetence is considered an act of heroism, then you really need to find another line of work.
Fine, we'll take this offline. Just make sure to touch base regarding the status of your action items by EOB. We can't afford to lose momentum.
Actually, people downloading movies guarantees he'll be employed for life.
Some time back, I said I'd never work for a company that makes such DRM systems due to ethical concerns. Now I realize that the whole thing is a beautiful scheme to constantly get paid by the movie industry to do what they've been told many times over is impossible.
It's like being hired to build a perpetual motion machine. But each version is more expensive than the last and runs for less time before stopping. And they keep hiring the same people to make new ones.
John Weiner, Milker of the MPAA and Designer of Minimally More Effective DRM, we salute you!
It won't. DRM is not about stopping piracy. It's about the content providers wanting to dictate to the consumer where, when, and how the media will be consumed.
In addition, it will not prevent "personal piracy." DRM will only prevent law-abiding people from exercising their fair use rights. People who wish to defy the law will simply download the movie, which will be ripped and available online in unencrypted form long before the first encrypted HD-DVD copy has been pressed.
The Slashdot editors have been paid by AMDs marketing department to insert these non sequiturs as part of an experimental advertising technique. Personally, I'd never heard of AMD's Alchemy chipset until I read about what a terrible job they were doing marketing it.
/. posting: "Several critical IE vulnerabilities were announced this week. With the tech media focused on this, it's going to be impossible for the folks at Mozilla to get the word out about the latest Firefox release."
Future
Copyright infringement is NOT A CRIME!
IANAL, but This recent story seems to contradict your claim. From the article:
Desir pleaded guilty to a three-count felony that charged him with copyright infringement and conspiracy to commit copyright infringement. Desir will face a maximum sentence of 15 years in prison when he is sentenced on March 18, 2005/
This is from the Loki FAQ:
Is this site legal?
Absolutely! This site is merely a tracker. No actual files are hosted on this site and as such, this tracker and its members and owners have absolutely no way of checking what people are sharing - it merely tracks the hash ID and the IP addresses of users connected to each particular torrent. It is your responsibility to check that the content of the files which you download are legal in your locality.
If they're running a tracker, they're toast. The plaintiff's lawyers will just have to do a search and replace on the Napster case, and most of the work is done for them.
My understanding is that one of the main things keeping Grokster out of the fire is the fact that it's a decentralized network. In such a network, the makes of the software don't have any control over what's on the network. BitTorrent is centralized, and the above claim that they have no way of checking what people are sharing is bunk. Donating to their defense is a waste of money.
I don't AIM high, but I have been known to Trillian Drunk on a fairly regular basis.
Say to him "No, rude would be if I told you to go get stuffed, like I'm about to do." You are using the code in a manner that isn't just permmited by the license, it's intended by the license.
I'm sick and tired of these fairweather open source developers. They're all for it when it means they can get a jumpstart on their project using freely available code and not have to ask permission. They're all for it when it means they look at what others have done for inspiration. They're all for it when it means they can attract more developers with the promise that their code won't be locked away to wither and rot so long as someone, anyone is interested in it. But once someone starts using it in a manner they don't approve of, they're up in arms.
Hey, that's the GPL. If it's all his code, he can stop releasing it under the GPL and use a more restrictive license. Otherwise, tell that arrogant bastard he needs to look down on all the GPL shoulders he's standing on and rethink his position.
Phone number, address and SSN? What parent doesn't have all of that info about his/her children, living or dead? So if I had an account with your ISP, my parents could access my email? That's really freaking reassuring.
I have all of that info for my former landlord. She filed for bankruptcy. Since we had to give her a deposit to rent the apartment, we were on her list of "unsecured creditors." The court sent us copies of docuements relating to the proceedings that included plenty of personal info, including her SSN.
Repeat after me: A Social Security Number is not an authentication key.
If Half-Life 2 is an indicator of what's to come, I'll stick with the status quo, thank you very much.
I'm required to log in to their servers every time I play the game. I can block Steam from using the network (ZoneAlarm is our friend), but after a few sessions in offline mode the software tells me that I won't be able to play again until it's able to reconnect to the servers. And in exchange for a system that costs less to distribute and reduces piracy, you'd think I'd get a discount on the game? Nope.
I am a legimitate user, and I have a strong desire to circumvent their protection mechanism. That's a very bad sign. Of course, I've validated their business model by buy^H^H^Hlicensing the game, but I won't make that mistake again for Half-Life 3.
Perhaps I'm being paranoid, but this seems like a coverup for more nefarious intents.
How many bad guys are really caught by monitoring everything out there and trying to filter out what's relevant? In the past, were they scanning every piece of mail, listening to every phone call, inspecting every bank account's purchase records, etc.? Why the sudden panic about not being able to monitor everything? They've never been able to monitor everything. But the "dark alley" argument is a great way to argue for more spy powers, isn't it?
Personally, I'd be surprised if postal mail weren't still the most popular method. No wiretaps, no log files, no drafts saved locally, and all it takes is a match to cover your tracks.
I've found that weaning people off IE is a lot like breaking a chemical addiction: most people don't want to change until they've hit rock bottom. Luckily for me, all the spyware out there makes rock bottom more accessible than ever.
My girlfriend became a Firefox convert after I walked her through removing a serious spyware infection. She has both IE and FireFox icons on her desktop, and she always chooses the right one. She's even starting to warm up to OpenOffice. She still insists on running with admin privileges, though. *Sigh.*
There are a couple problems with your reasoning.
First, you assume Microsoft has any fear whatsoever that the government will be willing and able to effectively bring anti-trust law to bear to restrain its practices. I have yet to see any evidence that Microsoft has pro-actively adjusted its business practices to avoid anti-trust actions. History has shown it's more profitable for them to settle things in the courts.
Second, they would have a monetary motivation to make windows only as secure as it absolutely has to be (which isn't very secure; Microsoft holds a monopoly) in order to increase the incentives for people to buy additional security software. And competing security software will always be behind because MS' team will have direct access to the code and forewarning of any changes to Windows.
$10/hour is pretty bad. Back when I was unemployed, I found plenty of similar offers for programming work. Usually such wages are indicative of company that either doesn't need/want highly skilled workers.
A local church offered me $12/hour to do IT work. The woman I spoke to was apologetic for the low wage, but she said there'd be fresh cookies and lemonade.
Day laborers get $15/hour around here.
A couple of friends of mine made $20/hour cleaning houses when they couldn't find programming work.
I could do algebra tutoring for $20/hour (my girlfriend is doing this now).
Freelance spyware removal can get you $25-$50/hour, depending on how well you hustle.
There are so many other things I'd do besides programming if the only coding job I could find paid $10/hour.
Yes, I realized that the illegal drug trade was the other industry begin referred to. I just think it's a fairly specious connection to make. Implying IT is like drug dealing because both sets of customers are labeled similarly seems silly.
At least try to work some humor in there somewhere:
There are two industries where all of the clients are assholes. Proctology is one of them.
Yeah, and in every other industry we're called "consumers." What's your point?
And I'm sure there'd be plenty of screaming, if Apple were a monopoly, and if it were actually preventing other vendors' music from playing on the iPod. I've got 1100 songs on my iPod, and I've never bought track from iTunes.
There are plenty of music players on the market, and plenty of options for buying music. Real could have every single one of its songs working on every iPod in the planet very easily if they simply dumped their DRM scheme. Problem solved. But they're trying to hack a competitor's proprietary system so that they can get their own proprietary system to work with it. That's bound to fail. Systems change, software gets updated, and eventual incompatibilities are almost guaranteed.
I own an iPod. And it's still just as functional as it was the day I got it. Near as I can tell, Apple is no closer to having an "Apple-approved-music-only" device than it was when it launched the iPod.
I've seen a half hour of dreck appear before movies, but only on certain showings of really big name movies. It happened when I went to the midnight showing of Fellowship of the Ring.
The lights went down promptly at midnight, and people applauded. And then the ads started. It was terrible. They weren't doing 30 second spots. These were commercials that went on for several minutes. It was like they somehow fused the DNA from an infomercial, a music video and a really boring SNL sketch. After a few extended-edition commercials, I checked my watch. Twelve past midnight. I checked again when the movie actually started, almost exactly at 12:30AM.
The fun part was the whole place was filled with fanatics who really wanted to see the movie, so many of us in the audience entertained ourselves by heckling the commercials. Nobody seemed to mind. My favorite: during an overly long commerical for cell phones, somebody shouted, "Why don't you call someone who cares?"
But I've never seen anything that bad during a movie during normal hours. At the theater I usually attend, it's almost always 15 minutes of commercials and previews before the movie.
People in the U.S. get pissed off about a lot of things. But we're allowed to be pissed about them. People get pissed about the Confederate flag (and I'm one of those people) but if you want to put one up in your front yard, stick a decal on your car, or tattoo it on your forehead, you're still allowed to do so. I'll point and laugh at you, but men with guns and uniforms aren't going to show up to stop you.
People getting pissed off about a game isn't the issue. The issue is government censorship.
I don't know about the rest of corporate America, but it's easy to see why this is the case with programmers. It's quite common for an interviewer to say, "Write a function that does foo." I have never heard an interviewer say, "OK, now document it."
I am Jack's disposable income.
I am what's left over after Jack spends money on things like food, shelter, taxes, and broadband.
You get to see me when you make Jack happy by giving him things like computer games, whisky, and lap dances.
When Jack gets pissed off, he hides me and you don't get to see me.
The (DHTML/CSS?) pops that flow over text perplex me. Do advertisers think that we're blocking popups accidentally?
As Tyler might say: "We've created generation of web users annoyed by popups. I'm wondering if another popup is the answer we really need."