With the passing of the Digital Millinium Copyright Act (DMCA) and the passing of the Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act (UCITA) in Virginia, the question of the purported rights of the holders of a copyright and the rights of consumers is now arising.
As an example: In the early 1980's RSA copyrighted their encryption algorithm which was then upheld by the courts. There have been many arguments that this uphelding of the RSA copyright set back the then-developing software industry by several years. Only recently did the RSA copyright expire.
On the flip side, current copyright law is what the GPL, the license under which the Linux kernel is distributed, is based on.
My question to the candidates is where do they believe the line is between the rights of the copyright holder and the rights of the buyer. Some would argue that the buyer, if he or she dislikes the conditions of whatever stipulations the seller makes for purchasing the product, can simply walk away. Others would argue that the property was purchased by the buyer and therefore he or she has the right to do with it as they please.
Your insights into this matter would be greatly appreciated. Thank you for your time and attention.
It may be time to dismantle the whole insurance industry, and replace it with a "universal coverage" overseen by the government. Something that ensures every citizen gets health care, whether their DNA shows a risk or not. Of course, britian's health coverage is a lousy example of this practice.
... as well as the Canadian system and just about any other government-run system out there. "Universal Healthcare" sounds good but in reality, it don't work.
Please check the following article on more information on why Government-run Health Care is a Bad Idea.
Note: I don't like the thought of insurance companies performing pre-screening any more than you do since it reeks of Gattaca. I personally have a genetically-inherited bleeding disorder and, while it's extremely rare that I run into complications because of it, it is expensive to treat.
BUT, I'd far rather take my chances with privately-owned insurance companies rather than some big government bureaucracy which will inevitably foul things up.
Rule of Thumb: The rate of government foul-ups increases exponentially the larger it gets.
I had a feeling it was only a matter of time before Cyberselfish was mentioned. Interested readers may want to read this review posted by Reason.com's Brian Doherty, who points out a few of the fallacies the book contains.
My respect for Jon Katz definitly took a hit broadsides with this one...
A couple of things I gleened from the article that haven't been mentioned here:
Carnivore is not just sitting in an FBI lab waiting to be rolled out, it's being rolled out now and possibly for a while now.
The article mentions that Earthlink refuses to connect it for technical reasons. Tell me, which ISPs have gone ahead and let it be installed? AOL? @Home? Concentric?
At least with corporations, I have the power to tell them that I don't agree with them... with my wallet!
I can't say that I've been using Microsoft software constantly for the past 10 years (which is wny blue screens don't plague me in my dreams^H^H^H^H^H^Hnightmares) but I have used it off and on enough to form a general opinion about new and existing software.
Most new software that's been released has been done in an attempt to compete with an already existing product. For example, MS Money was released to compete with Quicken and Outlook was released to compete with Eudora and Lotus Organizer (it always struck me as a combination of the two).
As for existing software, much of the attention has been given to adding more features and integrating them with other software. Was MS Office around in 1990? Nowadays you can take a spreadsheet in Excel and link it with a Word document that's going to be sent to multiple persons in an MS Access database via mail-merge. I'll give kudos to MS for adding this functionality (did someone have it before them?) although some of the more recent additions (that fscking PAPERCLIP!) have added far more bloat than is necessary IMHO.
For both new and existing software, Microsoft has been trying to make their software easier to use although the approach they take is more akin to copying whatever Apple or IBM (OS/2) is doing rather than attempting to come up with something new.
In short, Microsoft is fairly good at integrating existing ideas into their products, but not very good at coming up with new ones.
Business will drop dramatically from those who know what they are doing.
Slight problem. Of the people who register domains, how many "know what they are doing?"
For example, here in Central Ohio, there have been radio ads for Spot.cc which lets you reserve domain names in the *.cc domain. Unfortunately, they don't mention that you could (a) loose your domain name if it's trademarked or that (b) you're actually paying more than if you registered through NSI.
A lot of people have gone ahead and registered domain names that probably won't be worth very much. Ah well...
I sincerely hope that PostgreSQL is able to take off with the help of Great Bridge. It's a fine data base and I've learned a great deal about SQL Programming and Data Base Administration with it. It's a good learner's tool and you can't beat the feature set for its price.
Still, there are some features that I'd like to see put into PostgreSQL that would make it far more marketable for a truly enterprise-class RDBMS:
Data Base Replication a la Oracle. This would make the data base significantly more scalable.
An extended SQL set to provide for more complex stored procedures.
Continued addition of ANSI SQL92 features (can't wait to see what's new in 7.0!)
Personal rant here. One thing I like about PostgreSQL is that it's fairly easy to understand and administer. You have an idea of what's going on "under the hood". This is as opposed to Oracle which is great when it's working but otherwise tends to be mysterious as far as what it's doing. For this reason, Oracle is difficult for me to grok because it "feels" counter-intuitive.
It seems like Dude's biggest gripe is that MySQL is claiming to be an RDBMS when it's not, but I've never found the documentation on the MySQL web site to be particularly misleading and always thought that they are quite open about the areas that MySQL is lacking.
It could be that it's the users who mislead themselves. Some people may think "Oh! It uses SQL! It must be an RDBMS!" and then proceed to tell others about how fast their web site runs with it.
One possible solution to this would be to refuse any unencrypted E-Mail, and set your encryption key to about 4096 bits. It takes about 10 seconds on my PII 300 at work to encrypt an e-mail sized/etc/motd to a 4096 bit key. Joe Random Spammer isn't going to spend the time to encrypt to my key, he's not going to buy the computer hardware and even if he did, encrypting a million messages to a million different keys would take a significant amount of time, making spammer detection and elimination much easier. Your average spammer isn't even going to get your mail bounce with your encryption key in it.
This is certainly a viable solution, but there are easier, less drastic ways of managing your spam level. Once such method is to use a whitelist and a blacklist such as the method described in this perl.com article.
I personally don't use a whitelist/blacklist method, relying instead on the RBL and some anti-spam filters I've acquired. But, if my spam levels get above a certain point, say 2 or 3 p/day*, then I'll hack something up using procmail to implement this.
Cheers!
* - Yes, I realize that to some a mere 2-3 articles of spam per day must seem like sheer heaven to people who have to deal with 5+ p/day. I count myself very lucky my spam level is still maintainable.
Result: SPAM! Spam doesn't cost much money. And, like toxic dumping in international waters, it's easier to let someone else deal with cleaning up the mess - and cheaper.
Well, it doesn't cost the sender of the spam anymore than he or she is paying for their ISP (dial-up/cable modem/DSL/etc.). The true cost of spam is extra bandwidth ISPs and backbone providers have to set up in order to prevent their networks being flooded, the extra mail admins who have to sort through all the bounce logs that a typical spam run generates, and the time of the customer service representatives who have to deal with customers who are begging for relief.
What's needed is education. Marketers have to realize that spam == theft and is an amoral and unethical means of doing business. I'm not the type to advocate government intervention but since this involves theft of property, I believe laws are also needed to allow ISPs and consumers to recoup damages from spammers.
As for cell phones, I personally don't own one (and would never want to) but if someone spammed it when I knew I was being charged for it, I'd be plenty torqued.
The only question I can think of is how much research was performed by Pinkerton before they proferred the WAVE program to North Carolina (and, presumably, other states/school systems). What I am trying to get that is do they have any idea what modern school is like, what the typical student will have to deal with, and what type of social structures develop in today's schools.
I went to a high school with about 3000 students. In that kind of environment, Everyone was involved in some sort of clique. The atheletic clique, the band clique, the drama clique, etc. The whole emphasis was on conformity. Now say there's someone who doesn't quite fit in to any clique.
Given the nature of the cliques and their seemingly instinctive dislike for anyone who doesn't match what they perceive to be the norm, the person who doesn't belong will eventually be called in. Based on my own experiences and stories told to me by my friends, children, especially in middle school, can be very very cruel to anyone they don't like.
Some of the more interesting tidbits that are there include the fact that he was the Chief Counsel for Intellectual Property and Technology at Sun Company, as well as serving as counsel for Chevron.
If my memory of business law serves me correctly, a lot of law out there is based on precedence. A good example would be Roe v Wade setting the precedence for the legalization of abortion.
My question is can anyone think of any case out there which would establish precedence where someone had to surrender their encryption key/password or else risk contempt of court? In other words, has this actually been tested in the legal system?
How would you describe your political leanings? More to the point, what do you feel should be the role of government, if any, in the regulation of the Internet?
As the 'net gets more thoroughly entrenched into our culture and conscious, what are the possible dangers we, the users of the 'net, have to watch out for?
Have you considered consulting with the Free Software Foundation about the issues you're dealing with? At the very least they'll be able to point you in the correct direction as to how to approach this or recommend a good attorney. Also, if you're a university student, you *MIGHT* be able to get some advice from your university's student legal department which provides such services for free (well, at least mine did).
If you do consult with an attorney, it's best to follow what other people have been recommending and document the heck out of everything.
If you go over to JunkBusters , they have a script there which will let you generate form letters to the various marketing companies such as the DMA and Axicom to ask them to place your name on a "do not contact" list.
This should help reduce the amount of junk mail and telemarketing calls you receive although I still receive telemarketing calls for local charities.
Unfortunately, I'm probably going to have to do this again since I'm planning on moving to a smaller apartment closer to downtown in a few months.
I will agree with the concensus that the Clinton Administration's request is a Bad Thing that would make George Orwell turn in his grave. As I try and note the positive of any situation, if any have read through the CNN article, it says that about 250 Congressman have signed on to support legislation that would prevent such back-doors from being put into electronic devices.
So, in other words, SOMEONE has a clue up on Capital Hill.
Also, should this ever become law (Spirit Forbid), it can probably be challenged as a violation of the 4th amendment.
Slashdot Mirror
Howdy,
With the passing of the Digital Millinium Copyright Act (DMCA) and the passing of the Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act (UCITA) in Virginia, the question of the purported rights of the holders of a copyright and the rights of consumers is now arising.
As an example: In the early 1980's RSA copyrighted their encryption algorithm which was then upheld by the courts. There have been many arguments that this uphelding of the RSA copyright set back the then-developing software industry by several years. Only recently did the RSA copyright expire.
On the flip side, current copyright law is what the GPL, the license under which the Linux kernel is distributed, is based on.
My question to the candidates is where do they believe the line is between the rights of the copyright holder and the rights of the buyer. Some would argue that the buyer, if he or she dislikes the conditions of whatever stipulations the seller makes for purchasing the product, can simply walk away. Others would argue that the property was purchased by the buyer and therefore he or she has the right to do with it as they please.
Your insights into this matter would be greatly appreciated. Thank you for your time and attention.
Please check the following article on more information on why Government-run Health Care is a Bad Idea.
http://www.cato.org//pubs/pas/pa184.htm l (Scroll down to "single-payer systems")
Note: I don't like the thought of insurance companies performing pre-screening any more than you do since it reeks of Gattaca. I personally have a genetically-inherited bleeding disorder and, while it's extremely rare that I run into complications because of it, it is expensive to treat.
BUT, I'd far rather take my chances with privately-owned insurance companies rather than some big government bureaucracy which will inevitably foul things up.
Rule of Thumb: The rate of government foul-ups increases exponentially the larger it gets.
My respect for Jon Katz definitly took a hit broadsides with this one...
At least with corporations, I have the power to tell them that I don't agree with them
I can't say that I've been using Microsoft software constantly for the past 10 years (which is wny blue screens don't plague me in my dreams^H^H^H^H^H^Hnightmares) but I have used it off and on enough to form a general opinion about new and existing software.
Most new software that's been released has been done in an attempt to compete with an already existing product. For example, MS Money was released to compete with Quicken and Outlook was released to compete with Eudora and Lotus Organizer (it always struck me as a combination of the two).
As for existing software, much of the attention has been given to adding more features and integrating them with other software. Was MS Office around in 1990? Nowadays you can take a spreadsheet in Excel and link it with a Word document that's going to be sent to multiple persons in an MS Access database via mail-merge. I'll give kudos to MS for adding this functionality (did someone have it before them?) although some of the more recent additions (that fscking PAPERCLIP!) have added far more bloat than is necessary IMHO.
For both new and existing software, Microsoft has been trying to make their software easier to use although the approach they take is more akin to copying whatever Apple or IBM (OS/2) is doing rather than attempting to come up with something new.
In short, Microsoft is fairly good at integrating existing ideas into their products, but not very good at coming up with new ones.
Cheers!
Business will drop dramatically from those who know what they are doing.
Slight problem. Of the people who register domains, how many "know what they are doing?"
For example, here in Central Ohio, there have been radio ads for Spot.cc which lets you reserve domain names in the *.cc domain. Unfortunately, they don't mention that you could (a) loose your domain name if it's trademarked or that (b) you're actually paying more than if you registered through NSI.
A lot of people have gone ahead and registered domain names that probably won't be worth very much. Ah well...
It's the change of media that irritates some people.
Could you elaborate on this a little? Do you mean new media sources or simply a change in format?
Still, there are some features that I'd like to see put into PostgreSQL that would make it far more marketable for a truly enterprise-class RDBMS:
Personal rant here. One thing I like about PostgreSQL is that it's fairly easy to understand and administer. You have an idea of what's going on "under the hood". This is as opposed to Oracle which is great when it's working but otherwise tends to be mysterious as far as what it's doing. For this reason, Oracle is difficult for me to grok because it "feels" counter-intuitive.
It seems like Dude's biggest gripe is that MySQL is claiming to be an RDBMS when it's not, but I've never found the documentation on the MySQL web site to be
particularly misleading and always thought that they are quite open about the areas that MySQL is lacking.
It could be that it's the users who mislead themselves. Some people may think "Oh! It uses SQL! It must be an RDBMS!" and then proceed to tell others about how fast their web site runs with it.
Yet another case of rtfm.
One possible solution to this would be to refuse any unencrypted E-Mail, and set your encryption key to about 4096 bits. It takes about 10 seconds on my PII 300 at work to encrypt an e-mail sized
This is certainly a viable solution, but there are easier, less drastic ways of managing your spam level. Once such method is to use a whitelist and a blacklist such as the method described in this perl.com article.
I personally don't use a whitelist/blacklist method, relying instead on the RBL and some anti-spam filters I've acquired. But, if my spam levels get above a certain point, say 2 or 3 p/day*, then I'll hack something up using procmail to implement this.
Cheers!
* - Yes, I realize that to some a mere 2-3 articles of spam per day must seem like sheer heaven to people who have to deal with 5+ p/day. I count myself very lucky my spam level is still maintainable.
Result: SPAM! Spam doesn't cost much money. And, like toxic dumping in international waters, it's easier to let someone else deal with cleaning up the mess - and cheaper.
Well, it doesn't cost the sender of the spam anymore than he or she is paying for their ISP (dial-up/cable modem/DSL/etc.). The true cost of spam is extra bandwidth ISPs and backbone providers have to set up in order to prevent their networks being flooded, the extra mail admins who have to sort through all the bounce logs that a typical spam run generates, and the time of the customer service representatives who have to deal with customers who are begging for relief.
What's needed is education. Marketers have to realize that spam == theft and is an amoral and unethical means of doing business. I'm not the type to advocate government intervention but since this involves theft of property, I believe laws are also needed to allow ISPs and consumers to recoup damages from spammers.
As for cell phones, I personally don't own one (and would never want to) but if someone spammed it when I knew I was being charged for it, I'd be plenty torqued.
The only question I can think of is how much research was performed by Pinkerton before they proferred the WAVE program to North Carolina (and, presumably, other states/school systems). What I am trying to get that is do they have any idea what modern school is like, what the typical student will have to deal with, and what type of social structures develop in today's schools.
I went to a high school with about 3000 students. In that kind of environment, Everyone was involved in some sort of clique. The atheletic clique, the band clique, the drama clique, etc. The whole emphasis was on conformity. Now say there's someone who doesn't quite fit in to any clique.
Given the nature of the cliques and their seemingly instinctive dislike for anyone who doesn't match what they perceive to be the norm, the person who doesn't belong will eventually be called in. Based on my own experiences and stories told to me by my friends, children, especially in middle school, can be very very cruel to anyone they don't like.
Does Pinkerton realize this???
(p.s. This is a joke
If you want to know a little bit more about Todd Dickinson's background check out:
http://www.uspto.gov/web/offi ces/com/admin/index.html.
Some of the more interesting tidbits that are there include the fact that he was the Chief Counsel for Intellectual Property and
Technology at Sun Company, as well as serving as counsel for Chevron.
If my memory of business law serves me correctly, a lot of law out there is based on precedence. A good example would be Roe v Wade setting the precedence for the legalization of abortion.
My question is can anyone think of any case out there which would establish precedence where someone had to surrender their encryption key/password or else risk contempt of court? In other words, has this actually been tested in the legal system?
Howdy!
How would you describe your political leanings? More to the point, what do you feel should be the role of government, if any, in the regulation of the Internet?
As the 'net gets more thoroughly entrenched into our culture and conscious, what are the possible dangers we, the users of the 'net, have to watch out for?
Thank you for your time and attention.
ObDisclaimer: IANAL
Have you considered consulting with the Free Software Foundation about the issues you're dealing with? At the very least they'll be able to point you in the correct direction as to how to approach this or recommend a good attorney. Also, if you're a university student, you *MIGHT* be able to get some advice from your university's student legal department which provides such services for free (well, at least mine did).
If you do consult with an attorney, it's best to follow what other people have been recommending and document the heck out of everything.
Good Luck!
This should help reduce the amount of junk mail and telemarketing calls you receive although I still receive telemarketing calls for local charities.
Unfortunately, I'm probably going to have to do this again since I'm planning on moving to a smaller apartment closer to downtown in a few months.
When I did some intern-type work in the Pentagon during the Winter of '93/'94, the computer store on the promenade had a Doom demo set up.
Needless to say it was VERY popular *g*
I will agree with the concensus that the Clinton Administration's request is a Bad Thing that would make George Orwell turn in his grave. As I try and note the positive of any situation, if any have read through the CNN article, it says that about 250 Congressman have signed on to support legislation that would prevent such back-doors from being put into electronic devices.
So, in other words, SOMEONE has a clue up on Capital Hill.
Also, should this ever become law (Spirit Forbid), it can probably be challenged as a violation of the 4th amendment.
p.s. Kaa: Love your sig.