Would knowing, say, that the majority of interior shots (probably my home) are on one particular city block vs another really be worth that much more to an advertiser?
Yes. They can correlate it with property records and figure out who you are, what bank you have your mortgage with, how much you paid for your house, when you bought it, your likely income level, if you are married (more than one name on the mortgage) and that's just from the primary property records search in some states. Start cross-referencing it with other databases and my guess is that you'll have no secrets at all.
There's a war in Mexico, and the soldiers routinely cross-over to US territory, kidnap citizens, and drag them back to Mexico. Or just outright kill them. Washington DC used to be the murder capitol of the nation, but now it's been eclipsed by Phoenix Arizona. (Phoenix is also the #1 city for kidnapping.)
It is important to place such claims in context with actual statistics from the Dept of Justice.
1) From 2000 to 2009 the violent crime rate in Phoenix proper is down 30% and property crimes declined 46%. The most recently available statistics - for the 1st quarter of 2010 - indicate violent crime rate in Phoenix has plunged over the last year -- down another 17% homicide specifically is down another 38% and robberies down another 27%.
2) The violent crime rate across the entire state of Arizona is at the lowest its been since 1983. Property crime rates are at similarly low levels too.
3) Essentially all kidnappings in Phoenix are of criminals themselves. The Phoenix Police Department has made an official statement that, "Unless you're involved in the dope trade, there's a very very slim chance [that you'll be kidnapped.]"
4) Violent and property crime rates in other border states have also dropped significantly over the last decade. (numbers from 1998 to 2008 which is most recently available data) California: Violent crime down 28%, Property crime down 19% New Mexico: Violent crime down 32%, Property crime down 32% Texas: Violent crime down 10%, Property crime down 12%
Not only did the SEC fail to notice Madoff, they failed to react to people who reported Madoff. So, it seems to me the real problem here isn't one that can be solved by crowdsourcing, unless vigilantism counts.
Speeding and then bragging about it is unacceptable. That's willfully risking the lives of other people. It is good that a young driver learns this lesson early, before he kills someone with that attitude.
Yep, in the future he will make sure not to brag about it and everybody will be safe.
For another, I am speculating on the right of United States residents, including the editors of Slashdot, to use VideoLAN products.
Tangential riff: Anyone else notice CNN using videolan recently? It looked to me like they used it all the time for showing video of the oil spewing out of the well. They frequently had multiple videos running simultaneously, each in its own window and often there would be at least one 'dead' window with the trademark videolan traffic cone in it.
While there could definitely be such an app, the article definitely sounds like an advertisement for their product rather than a security notification.
It seems like its gotten to the point that anything that comes out of Kapersky, Sophos, Symantec, et al, is just a bunch of far-fetched hype for some product or service they are hawking. These guys have become so transparent that I have concluded that they are just a higher grade of spammers.
Had it been said as part of a competent explanation, it probably wouldn't have been picked up on. However his halting, improper explanation made it seem that he probably really did think of the Internet as being just like a sewer system, which is not at all correct.
That and the fact that his rambling was his justification to block the addition of net neutrality language to the telecom bill that he himself had 'authored' as head of the commerce committee. By demonstrating his rather poor grasp of the workings of the internet he also demonstrated that he really wasn't qualified to have so much control over it.
People laugh at Gore for saying "he invented the internet" when he really didn't say that, but Stevens has only gummed it up since then. Plus, it's ironic that, at least according to Wikipedia, Declan McCullough is an apologist for Stevens's "tubes" comment but was the first to exaggerate what Gore said for comedic effect.
Also, given imperfect information about the world, perhaps just doing what has worked up until now for your ancestors is not a bad strategy in general, especially for the less intelligent.
FWIW, that's also George Washington's argument for organized religion: "Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect, that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle."
That's the same line of thinking that says "Well you didn't shovel your walk -- so it's YOUR fault I slipped and fell.". Nobody made Assange post the documents. His actions are his own responsibility; no matter what fingers are pointed or what excuses are given, he is the one that published them.
However it is hypocritical for the same people who refused wikileaks's request to help "save the civilians" to now criticize wikileaks for not doing it either.
Most of Android is not Linux. Linux is a kernel, and the kernel remains GPLv2 licensed. Anyone distributing Android handsets is distributing the kernel, and if they won't give you a copy of their kernel source they're in breach of the GPL, of course.
Hence MY ENTIRE POINT about the GPLv3. Thank you for restating the obvious.
Now pictures this: if wireless providers went all net neutral as per your calls, then a phone call would have the same priority as an app downloading updates in the background. Do you know you're going to always have good enough reception to guarantee call quality? Or are OS/firmware updates not more important than that stupid youtube of a dog who can't get up? ...
The point is that for wireless, there is a need to prioritize bandwidth, and because it's a fixed bandwidth, if you want priority over something else, you can't just claim it like you do on a landline network.
That's ridiculous for at least two reasons:
1) All bandwidth is fixed, wired or wireless. Your usage of "just claim it" is nonsensical. 2) Net neutrality is about paying for a generic pipe and getting egalitarian access. Paying for just telephone service is not buying a generic pipe. But paying for internet access is. (And as for that youtube vs firmware update - if anythinh the youtube video is more important since firmware updates are rarely, if ever, so urgent that they can't be a background task, all though really both can buffered without causing a significant problem.)
There are dozens of potential reasons why there would be an exception for wireless. Most likely Verizon wasn't willing to allow any application run over wireless because they know their network couldn't handle it. Or possibly because Verizon wants to be able to dictate what devices can run on their wireless network (we know this is true). To choose one explanation without a reason is confirmation bias.
No, there really is only one reason wireless gets special treatment - it's because the wireless carriers in the USA have a much greater stranglehold on that segment than they do on the rest of the internet and they aren't about to give that up without the mother of all fights. You see it in everything they do from carrier-locked phones with deliberately crippled firmware to lawsuits against any town that wants to deploy their own public utility wireless network.
The only way I could get behind a proposal that throws wireless to the dogs like this is if competition in the wireless provider market were opened up far beyond the current FCC bidding system which has produced the current defacto oligopoly.
This isn't perfect but this is progress. Any other attempt at open source and the who party would have walked away from Google. You're out of your goddamn mind if you're going to criticize the current scenario
Progress? Open source isn't for open source's sake - it's for the end user's sake. Or at least that's what the GPL has always been about. That these companies have such a stranglehold on their market that they can then use the tivo loophole to get free labor is not progress for anything but the corp's bottom lines. Let them use BSD were no loophole is required if that's what they want.
You say, "we might even edge closer to true openess" but your prediction is in direct conflict with your own thesis that the "CEOs and jerkfaces that run the carriers and phone manufacturing plants aren't about to let that chunk of change slip through"
So yeah, I am criticizing the current scenario and I say you are out of your goddamn mind for rationalizing it.
Oddly, you're too lazy to put up links to prove your assertions but you're not too lazy to type two fairly longwinded paragraphs rewording the original poster and then multiple follow up insults to requests that you prove your theories.
Clue for you x2 - not my theories. Cafuckinpiche? The only theory I hold here is that the original poster was talking about the Lamo. Its easy to insult an idiot, drinnkypoo and you have made your status self-evident with your ridiculous demands, and as for 'longwinded' lol, you must be new to teh internetz.
I'm looking for a word from the wise, and so far I've seen no evidence that there will be any.
Look dillweed, if you have a problem you have it with the original poster. All I did was explain what he was saying AS REQUESTED. Not enough for you? Do your own damn homework and learn your idioms while you are it.
If the US government had the ability to routinely intercept & decrypt AES-encrypted messages from a Blackberry Enterprise Server, I think some evidence would have appeared in court cases against high-value criminal targets.
If so they would either keep it sealed or, as in the case(s) where the FBI tapped into OnStar like systems in order to eavesdrop on passengers, they just didn't go into the full details of how it was accomplished. In the case of OnStar-like eavesdropping it only came to light when the companies started refusing to do it because it interfered with their business - so the DoJ took them to court to try and force it.
Slashdot Mirror
Would knowing, say, that the majority of interior shots (probably my home) are on one particular city block vs another really be worth that much more to an advertiser?
Yes. They can correlate it with property records and figure out who you are, what bank you have your mortgage with, how much you paid for your house, when you bought it, your likely income level, if you are married (more than one name on the mortgage) and that's just from the primary property records search in some states. Start cross-referencing it with other databases and my guess is that you'll have no secrets at all.
He's also wrong. The kidnappings are mainly of illegal immigrants.
Cite.
You may suspect the motives of the guy making the statement I quoted but (a) he's in a pretty good place to know and (b) at least I have a citation.
We cannot, because your government will not let us, decriminalize consumption in Mexico.
I think you guys just did about a year ago.
There's a war in Mexico, and the soldiers routinely cross-over to US territory, kidnap citizens, and drag them back to Mexico. Or just outright kill them. Washington DC used to be the murder capitol of the nation, but now it's been eclipsed by Phoenix Arizona. (Phoenix is also the #1 city for kidnapping.)
It is important to place such claims in context with actual statistics from the Dept of Justice.
1) From 2000 to 2009 the violent crime rate in Phoenix proper is down 30% and property crimes declined 46%. The most recently available statistics - for the 1st quarter of 2010 - indicate violent crime rate in Phoenix has plunged over the last year -- down another 17% homicide specifically is down another 38% and robberies down another 27%.
2) The violent crime rate across the entire state of Arizona is at the lowest its been since 1983. Property crime rates are at similarly low levels too.
3) Essentially all kidnappings in Phoenix are of criminals themselves. The Phoenix Police Department has made an official statement that, "Unless you're involved in the dope trade, there's a very very slim chance [that you'll be kidnapped.]"
4) Violent and property crime rates in other border states have also dropped significantly over the last decade.
(numbers from 1998 to 2008 which is most recently available data)
California: Violent crime down 28%, Property crime down 19%
New Mexico: Violent crime down 32%, Property crime down 32%
Texas: Violent crime down 10%, Property crime down 12%
Not only did the SEC fail to notice Madoff, they failed to react to people who reported Madoff. So, it seems to me the real problem here isn't one that can be solved by crowdsourcing, unless vigilantism counts.
Speeding and then bragging about it is unacceptable. That's willfully risking the lives of other people. It is good that a young driver learns this lesson early, before he kills someone with that attitude.
Yep, in the future he will make sure not to brag about it and everybody will be safe.
Android is for faggots.
Please join our new facebook group - Fags for Android!
For another, I am speculating on the right of United States residents, including the editors of Slashdot, to use VideoLAN products.
Tangential riff: Anyone else notice CNN using videolan recently? It looked to me like they used it all the time for showing video of the oil spewing out of the well. They frequently had multiple videos running simultaneously, each in its own window and often there would be at least one 'dead' window with the trademark videolan traffic cone in it.
While there could definitely be such an app, the article definitely sounds like an advertisement for their product rather than a security notification.
It seems like its gotten to the point that anything that comes out of Kapersky, Sophos, Symantec, et al, is just a bunch of far-fetched hype for some product or service they are hawking. These guys have become so transparent that I have concluded that they are just a higher grade of spammers.
Had it been said as part of a competent explanation, it probably wouldn't have been picked up on. However his halting, improper explanation made it seem that he probably really did think of the Internet as being just like a sewer system, which is not at all correct.
That and the fact that his rambling was his justification to block the addition of net neutrality language to the telecom bill that he himself had 'authored' as head of the commerce committee. By demonstrating his rather poor grasp of the workings of the internet he also demonstrated that he really wasn't qualified to have so much control over it.
People laugh at Gore for saying "he invented the internet" when he really didn't say that, but Stevens has only gummed it up since then. Plus, it's ironic that, at least according to Wikipedia, Declan McCullough is an apologist for Stevens's "tubes" comment but was the first to exaggerate what Gore said for comedic effect.
Also, given imperfect information about the world, perhaps just doing what has worked up until now for your ancestors is not a bad strategy in general, especially for the less intelligent.
FWIW, that's also George Washington's argument for organized religion: "Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect, that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle."
That's the same line of thinking that says "Well you didn't shovel your walk -- so it's YOUR fault I slipped and fell.". Nobody made Assange post the documents. His actions are his own responsibility; no matter what fingers are pointed or what excuses are given, he is the one that published them.
However it is hypocritical for the same people who refused wikileaks's request to help "save the civilians" to now criticize wikileaks for not doing it either.
Most of Android is not Linux. Linux is a kernel, and the kernel remains GPLv2 licensed. Anyone distributing Android handsets is distributing the kernel, and if they won't give you a copy of their kernel source they're in breach of the GPL, of course.
Hence MY ENTIRE POINT about the GPLv3. Thank you for restating the obvious.
Now pictures this: if wireless providers went all net neutral as per your calls, then a phone call would have the same priority as an app downloading updates in the background. Do you know you're going to always have good enough reception to guarantee call quality? Or are OS/firmware updates not more important than that stupid youtube of a dog who can't get up?
...
The point is that for wireless, there is a need to prioritize bandwidth, and because it's a fixed bandwidth, if you want priority over something else, you can't just claim it like you do on a landline network.
That's ridiculous for at least two reasons:
1) All bandwidth is fixed, wired or wireless. Your usage of "just claim it" is nonsensical.
2) Net neutrality is about paying for a generic pipe and getting egalitarian access. Paying for just telephone service is not buying a generic pipe. But paying for internet access is.
(And as for that youtube vs firmware update - if anythinh the youtube video is more important since firmware updates are rarely, if ever, so urgent that they can't be a background task, all though really both can buffered without causing a significant problem.)
There are dozens of potential reasons why there would be an exception for wireless. Most likely Verizon wasn't willing to allow any application run over wireless because they know their network couldn't handle it. Or possibly because Verizon wants to be able to dictate what devices can run on their wireless network (we know this is true). To choose one explanation without a reason is confirmation bias.
No, there really is only one reason wireless gets special treatment - it's because the wireless carriers in the USA have a much greater stranglehold on that segment than they do on the rest of the internet and they aren't about to give that up without the mother of all fights. You see it in everything they do from carrier-locked phones with deliberately crippled firmware to lawsuits against any town that wants to deploy their own public utility wireless network.
The only way I could get behind a proposal that throws wireless to the dogs like this is if competition in the wireless provider market were opened up far beyond the current FCC bidding system which has produced the current defacto oligopoly.
Eh... we do. Except that it's Apache 2.0, which is just like BSD but with an anti-patent-burn clause.
Since when is Linux apache licensed?
And BTW, parent post is spot-on.
I'm not disputing the truth of the circumstances he described, I'm disputing his rationalizing of the response to those circumstances.
This isn't perfect but this is progress. Any other attempt at open source and the who party would have walked away from Google. You're out of your goddamn mind if you're going to criticize the current scenario
Progress? Open source isn't for open source's sake - it's for the end user's sake. Or at least that's what the GPL has always been about. That these companies have such a stranglehold on their market that they can then use the tivo loophole to get free labor is not progress for anything but the corp's bottom lines. Let them use BSD were no loophole is required if that's what they want.
You say, "we might even edge closer to true openess" but your prediction is in direct conflict with your own thesis that the "CEOs and jerkfaces that run the carriers and phone manufacturing plants aren't about to let that chunk of change slip through"
So yeah, I am criticizing the current scenario and I say you are out of your goddamn mind for rationalizing it.
Doh! Too many Fs.
Carriers and phone vendors are demonstrating that they can even lock down Android so "open" doesn't mean f-ckall to the end consumer.
Thus providing a very widespread example of why the EFF released the GPLv3.
You can help us be judicious by providing good keywords with which to start searching.
Yeah and I could help you suck my dick by unzipping too.
I agree with parent.
How nice for you.
Oddly, you're too lazy to put up links to prove your assertions but you're not too lazy to type two fairly longwinded paragraphs rewording the original poster and then multiple follow up insults to requests that you prove your theories.
Clue for you x2 - not my theories. Cafuckinpiche? The only theory I hold here is that the original poster was talking about the Lamo. Its easy to insult an idiot, drinnkypoo and you have made your status self-evident with your ridiculous demands, and as for 'longwinded' lol, you must be new to teh internetz.
I'm looking for a word from the wise, and so far I've seen no evidence that there will be any.
Look dillweed, if you have a problem you have it with the original poster. All I did was explain what he was saying AS REQUESTED.
Not enough for you? Do your own damn homework and learn your idioms while you are it.
Fuck off. If a word to the wise isn't enough for you, then you aren't very smart.
Why not get into details? What's fishy about it?
Because I am too damn lazy to retype something most people could dig up on their own with the judicious use of a search engine or two.
If the US government had the ability to routinely intercept & decrypt AES-encrypted messages from a Blackberry Enterprise Server, I think some evidence would have appeared in court cases against high-value criminal targets.
If so they would either keep it sealed or, as in the case(s) where the FBI tapped into OnStar like systems in order to eavesdrop on passengers, they just didn't go into the full details of how it was accomplished. In the case of OnStar-like eavesdropping it only came to light when the companies started refusing to do it because it interfered with their business - so the DoJ took them to court to try and force it.