Seriously. Why should the customer (who is already paying out the ass already) have to suffer and pay more money?
Why isn't the solution for AT&T to improve their network?
(and honestly, it's not that bad, especially with a 3GS), it's only on occasion if you are in small extremely dense areas....I live in Philly, and when the Phillies won the world series last year there was a parade. The entire city was on Broad st - that is one of the only times where there was a major problem - and that seemed to occur with other networks too....Other than that there have been times in small densely populated areas on Saturday nights where the web is slow or there are issues, but it's gotten a lot better.
If AT&T did what the author is suggesting then I would expect most of the customers who have purchsed Iphones exactly BECAUSE you can go online anytime to feel screwed...and screwing people who make you so much money, especially people who are very comfortable using the social features of the web..that's a bad idea.
Also, we're talking about mobile web usage, NOT people downloading binaires from newsgroups or torrents - the most demanding use is probably from people streaming music for pandora or streaming videos from youtube....Having a network support this and doing what AT&T needs to do to support the products they've sold and make SO much money off of monthly is the solution, it's the right solution, and it's the only real solution....So as I said, this guy can STFU.
I agree with you, but I would also add that I don't think capitalism is the right word for our system...
It certainly isn't pure captialism. What we have is a sort of soft fascism, a corporatism of protected markets. The markets aren't free, despite what people call them, they are protected and artificially controlled/manipulated - and that's not even getting into how corporate power is protected and government and corporations work together to get around regulation/law.
It's certainly not a great system for the majority of people and is getting worse by the day.
SO does the internet. Operations undertaken by highly trained and specialized intelligence units have found that there is atomic bomb data available on the internet, and thus far the INTERNET has REFUSED to allow inspections - additionally there are islamic radicals taking about jihad.
Whatever your worst nightmare is, the internet has it..There is only one option:
The INTERNET MUST BE LIBERATED (by bombs).
Don't let the warning come in the form of a mushroom cloud, (or lolcat suicide bombers).
I'm aware of the practical limitations and not suggesting that it would be a practical thing to compete with provider service now - but if there is ever a serious civil emergency (and I can think of several that are likely to happen at some point, unfortunately) something developed along these lines could be incredibly.
I can also see certain scenarios where something like this could develop over a period of time...Someone does a proof of concept, people who like to tinker start playing around, something gets developed and refined and then a use is found among a niche or subculture which later expands..you know what i'm getting at I'm sure.
I think the idea of decentralized communications is something that sounds great to a lot of people in this day and age....
I think this sort of decentralized network is a great idea - it's something we need to see more of, and has tons of uses.
Can you imagine if an application was released that created just such an "off of the network" mesh and would work with most phones and it caught on like Napster did? Can you imagine how the mobile providers would go apeshit if large groups of people circumvented their network and were able to communicate on their own?
Seriously, cameras in people's homes to make sure their kids are being "properly parented;" testing DNA at the border to determine ethnicity (and who knows what else, because what does race have to do with nationality these days)... Branding children as future criminals at age 5 based on hyperactive or normal anti-social kid behavior....and there's more that I can't even remember now.
England is becoming some nightmare 1984/Gattaca mashup...Brave New World indeed.
Google has a point; they never claimed those Google Apps are open source.
Maybe the work that he does to stay in compliance will provide a sort of "road map" for others in the future who wish to mod/hack so that they can do so without ending up being threatened legally, yet will still be able to provide their work to the community in a usable form that will allow the the mods to be easily installed without the user losing functionality they want.
I have to agree with everyone else who has stated that "outmaneuvering" is sensationalistic and not really accurate.
Depends on how you define glory, and I don't know if you're asking because you're considering entering, re-entering, or quitting the field....
If having career where there is a wide variety of different sorts of job opportunities available (if you have skills) appeals to you, then IT is good. If you can work well with others and can make technical concepts easy to understand for others who aren't as technical, then you have even more options...Like any other field, it all depends on the job.
It's a field where you can start your own business and be successful.
I guess my point is that "The IT Field" is HUGE. There are so many different types of jobs, so many different levels within the field...Most of them pay well, some of them pay ridiculous amounts if you're good. However, in most cases you have to pay your dues and get some experience before you get that great job; and it changes. You have to be able to adapt. There are some shit IT jobs too, but generally if you have the skills and experience you wont be stuck in one.
For most people in IT, maybe the type of glory they get is feeling good when they come up with a solution, or the type of glory you get when you bring a server that has gone down back online and people can work again and are thanking you for fixing it....but. then again, you could end up with a job somewhere really cool, with innovative work conditions and become part of a team that creates something useful that the whole world uses..I am sure some of people on various teams at Google probably feel that way - look at things like gmail or googlemaps.
Maybe you'll invent something new....I run the IT dept for a medical technology developer..We make a device that can detect serious chronic diseases before there are any symptoms,...I feel good about that at times, but I wouldn't call it glory.
I would suggest that there are more practical considerations than glory. I always thought that people who wanted glory in their work environment more than anything else became cops or firemen or surgeons...but what do I know?
One thing I love about the field is that, so far it has provided me with a career, and the knowledge that I can go anywhere where there are computers and servers and make a living, even if it's freelancing until something better comes along. It's provided me the ability to make enough money to live very comfortably, and I like it. I like computers, I like tech and have played with computers and technology since getting an Apple ][ at age 8 (1980). I have worked in IT professionally since 1996 , and never have been unemployed since (unless I wanted to be for a brief period).
As far as obsolescence, I know why people think that...and while some positions may change or phase out over time due to things becoming more "end user friendly" - there will always be things that cannot be handled by the non-technical or amateurs, so no..I don't see obsolescence...only change - and if you stay on your toes, you can adapt.
In the past decade (or a little more) the people of that country really seem to have lot a lot of their freedoms.....It's amazing how backward and wrongheaded their government's plans have been:
The people lost most of their gun rights.
The government goes apeshit over cartoons and charges a guy with a serious kiddie porn charge over a nude simpsons cartoon modificatiion.
The government will stop at nothing to be able to have wholesale filtering and censorship on the internet for everyone, despite the fact that massess of people took to the streets and protested and pretty much every high profile techie (who wasn't working towards the govt agenda) warned about sll of the problems (technical andd otherwise) inherent in doing this...I mean, come on - the fact that they think they'll be able to pull off an "unhackable" windows netbook technically is almost as ridiculous as the the plan itself is antithetic to a free society.
Who is advising these people? How ridiculous is this? And RFID chips install to boot?
I guess Australia is on it's way back to becoming the world's largest "island" (yes, I know, it's a continent) penal colony.
If this netwbook becomes a reality I can see the slashdot headlines from the day after it's release: "2 high school freshman were arrested in Australia; charged with hacking their unhackable netbook computers.." which I am sure this ignorant govt will make a major crime.
It's a good argument, but I would also say that there is a HUGE problem with the entire concept of "legal" and "Illegal" songs - obviously the industry groups like the RIAA want to make everything that isn't a new, direct purchase of a brand new album from a retailer (E.G. format shifting, sharing a CD with your mom, etc) illegal, but our culture and the law (in a lot of cases from what I can tell), would disagree.
It's clear that people doing egregious commercial piracy and selling bootleg copies of CDs you could purchase anywhere are illegal and should be.
But If we look at the day-to-day cases of what the RIAA would consider an "Illegal" song, like someone downloading an album which they have never purchased from an FTP site that belongs to someone they don't know - which laws are they breaking? Are they civil or criminal laws?
How does that equation change if, say, the files come from bittorrent and are an album that the person already owns (I do this a lot, with the fast connection I have it's easier for me to download stuff I already own and life than it is to rip it)?
I just think that with fair use and the state of the laws, it's not clear exactly what the legal status of a lot of this sort of stuff is, despite the attempts by industry groups to make everything seem illicit. The fact that they are trying to force materials into elementary schools to equate downloading music with theft of physical property is telling (and ridiculous); they are going after the kids trying to indoctrinate them at a young age, and are using the abuse of the legal system to financially intimidate people into settling their cases - which shouldn't be necessary if the legalities surrounding this are as cut and dried as they'd like the public to believe they are.
The most interesting thing is what he found; he did actually find what he was looking for and then some, and as you alluded to in your post, he felt compelled to share it with the world.
While that may be naive, I think it shows that he wasn't mal intentioned. Obviously we cannot have people doing this, but given the subject and the lack of disclosure on the part of the government for so many years, it's understandable.
The government is embarrassed, the person responsible for those systems and their security should definitely be fired.
..I don't want to get into the whole "dabating 9/11" but in my opinion it's ludicrous to suggest that nobody had suspected that could be done. I know that Bush and different people liked to say that, but I find it ridiculous in light of the evidence AND the fact that the people at NORAD and those who are on guard against this sort of thing aren't stupid. A kid can figure out that a plane can be deliberately crashed into something and it's going to make a mess.
There were several drills occurring that very morning involving hijacked planes used as weapons and other scenarios that boggle the mind when you realize what happened.
Then there is Operation Bojinka (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bojinka_plot), which never really got off of the ground, but which was an operational plan....That was from 1995, and those responsible for our security were well aware of that.
One thing I think everyone can agree on is that it was an awful day - but I think (unfortunately) that violence and terrorism will happen again. Regardless of its source, method, and motives - it's too effective; just like the political use of fear - it gets results.
What doesn't have to happen is that we don't have to give up who we are to get some supposed (false IMO) sense of "total safety" (which just doesn't exist)...but if you scare people enough for long enough they generally will capitulate.
I just think the entire notion of a color coded "Terror alert system" for the public is ridiculous.
Yes. Eternally staying vigilant against government abuses.
I am tired of government manipulation of the public via fear. There has always been terrorism, there always will be terrorism, and from what I can tell, a very high percentage it is state sponsored, in one way or the other.
Obviously we need military and intelligence services; they shouldbe the best in the world, and we need security - but what happened on Sept 11th is ridiculous and NEVER should have happened - all of this bullshit about all of these simultaneous coincedences letting this occur, as well as there being drills occurring at the WTC and Pentagon that very morning for THAT exact scenario (that's a fact by the way, not some truther conspiracy bullshit - look into it if you doubt that)...
I have no idea what really went on - but I just don't think that our country and the security of the people have been in the best hands. There is an article by Michael LeMieux called "Loss of Freedom" which I think sums up how I feel about the how the entire anti-terror laws situation in the US has been handled since 2001 quite well, here is an excerpt:
"On the Friday prior to voting on the PATRIOT Act, the Judiciary Committee passed a bipartisan version of the bill that did not have the broad sweeping powers wanted by Attorney General Ashcroft and the White House. At 3:45 am on Sunday the bill was printed; but it had been modified to include all the items of the original bill which, according to Rep. DeFazio from Oregon, were a direct challenge to our civil liberties. These same items had been rejected by Congress even before 9/11 occurred.
According to Rep. Barr, the PATRIOT Act was a device under the guise of fighting terrorism to expand federal police power. When we look at who attacked us, we see no U.S. citizens. Yet when we look at the PATRIOT Act, time and time again it provides the federal government with mechanisms to spy on the citizens of the United States, not on foreign terrorists. If the purpose of the PATRIOT Act is to aid in fighting the enemy, it has to make any rational person think, âoewho do they think is the enemy?â Obviously the government believes it is U. S. citizens. We have met the enemy, and it is us. "
The ignorance of the anti-gun people never fails to amaze me.
If the world could be completely disarmed, where all guns would cease to exist, and nobody would have them, period...Nobody. Then I might agree that it would be a good thing.
However, what you are advocating is ridiculous, because what you (and every other person who says similar stuff) are actually advocating, is that ONLY law abiding citizens should be unable to own firearms. Law abiding gun owners aren't the problem, the follow laws... They are the ones who sometimes stop crimes before the police arrive. They are the ones who have CCW permits and stop deranged sociopaths who are going on public murder sprees before they can kill or before they can kill as many people as they'd like to.
Since your argument doesn't provide some magic that actually causes all firearms to cease to exist, criminals will still have them, they don't respect or follow laws, and such laws actually bring them comfort because it lets them know that when they do commit their crime, (especially if it's in public) they don't have to worry about a good samaritan stopping them...
That's just the logic, without even getting into the constitutional/American heritage side of the issue.
Your statement is such a simplistic view that has nothing to do with reality, and it's never going to happen.
I agree with a bit of what you've said, but I totally disagree with the last two sentence in your post... and since you weren't there how would you know?
So what, you think this man is sitting in jail all of this time and wouldn't hand the password over to someone *just to be a dick*?
It is true that every place has politics, and that you have to be mindful of them, and sometimes the most technically gifted among us seem to (at times, but not everyone and not always) be short of the political and "working well with others" side of things, but none of that means he was all in the wrong, or that there isn't more to the story, or that the people who actually treated this like a pissing match and blew it all out of proportion aren't the ones who are really in the wrong here. Maybe it could have been handled differently, but maybe not....
Just because in a similar circumstance you or many other people might back down, doesn't mean he was wrong....I think he thought he was absolutely doing what was right and what was in the best interests of the city, I think that there were some things going on that shouldn't have been and he took a principled stand..... The way he has been treated in court, the fact that 3 of the 4 changes have been dropped and the remaining charge is completely dubious and he *STILL* is being held with 5M bail tells me that something isn't right here...Even if he DID act like a total asshole (which I tend to think is not the case), that bail is still completely inappropriate.
I really don't think he'll have a hard time getting work after this. It's possible he won't be able to work for a municipality or certain corporations, but so what...
Lori Drew seems to be a disgusting and cruel harpy, but what happened to her had nothing to do with the rule of law or justice and everything to do with abusing the legal system to try to try punish her for many things that weren't crimes. Violating a website's TOS being de facto turned into a crime? Please...
The precedents this would have set (had it been allowed to stand) would have been horrible for everyone who loves anonymity on the internet (among other things).
It's so sad, what happened to Meghan Meier, but Lori Drew wasn't ultimately responsible for that - and it is my opinion that the people who think she was are the type of people who like to pass reactionary legislation without really looking at the full picture.
Now there is all sorts of bad state legislation flying around to keep an eye on.
I've had an app for a while that I use sometimes that provides an augmented reality experience; it's called "RJDJ Album" and it's pretty cool in that you fire it up and put on your headphones, and it's got several different "tracks" which are actually different audio filters and effects set up in a way to provide extremely cool, rhythmic and interesting "music" out of whatever the microphone picks up.
It may sound like something only a stoner would love, and it's definitely got that going for it - but it actually is a lot cooler and more fun then you might imagine. All of the "tracks" are different and many of them, instead of just being trippy or weird actually do create a sort of song - and it's never the same thing; some of them are very complex and rhythmic and sound like they could be off of an Aphex Twin album or something.
The instant art aspect of it is really cool - it would be interesting to see something visual that works in a similar way....
Anytime government or corporate behemoths talk about "fixing" something like the backbone or underlying structure of the internet they're generally looking to fix it to better serve their interests.
As many posts have already eloquently opined, these attempts can often be about control; the proposed changes can involve things most of us who support privacy, anonymity online and true network neutrality abhorr.
The internet will continue to evolve as it always has, and only in ways in which it needs to, if it stays as "ownerless" as it is now...to me, anything else, especially if it involves more beaurocracy or legislation or control being given to some body that isn't purely committed to an open, free internet, is dangerous.
Kind of like a crack or heroin dealer...they want you to keep playing.
The solution, clearly, is to switch to crack or heroin. Then, if it's taking up too much of your time or money you can go to rehab, and the game wont matter quite as much, because life will become a very interesting game where you'll gain lot of XP and have to deal with real world consequences if you screw up!!
Our "game" has a slammin hip-hop soundtrack and plenty of excessive violence; choose the "North Philadelphia" campaign for you newcomers, you'll get into to the action fast that way!
Look, I don't so much of an issue with the rest of your post, but IMO the statement below shows a clear misunderstanding of the socioeconomics, politics and culture in the areas where these things are occuring - it sounds nice, but means nothing in the real world.
" Simple way to reduce civilian casualties: The civilians stop ALLOWING the terrorists/enemy to hide amongst them, and they will stop dying."
It doesn't make much practical sense either, you're saying that the unarmed, downtrodden families are supposed to stop the armed ruthless thugs? Is that it?
That's like when someone who doesn't understand the drug issue talking about getting dealers off the streets:
"Hey, if the people who lived in north Philadelphia didn't allow drug sales to occur there'd be no drug sales in our neighborhood."
But beware, you have violated the code of usenet, several rules of which are "never mention usenet," as well as promoting an indexing website that allows the uninitiated access to some of our secrets....and should the guild find you, well.....I don't think I have to tell YOU what will happen.
Yeah, I feel the same way. The TV addicted sheeple are so willing to give up freedoms people gave so much for just to have the state tell them "we'll protect you."
It's pretty bad here, but the shit I hear coming out of your country makes me really feel bad for you guys.
I have always wanted to visit London so bad - every music biography I had read when I was younger made it seem so cool there, all of these great bands from the 60s on, punks fighting Thatcherism, etc, all of the historical stuff, it had always seemed like a very interesting city......Then I hear about 5 year olds being labelled as future criminals and put in databases, and police tactics, brutality and oversealous prosecutions being used against peaceful, cultured protesters that are the same as the stuff the police do here at times, cameras everywhere - total surveillance state, the anti-terror laws that have destroyed your civil liberties just as ours have destroyed ours - and now it seems there is a very definitive Orwellian "Big Brother" vibe going on there....
it's sad what is happening and has happened to our countries.
Slashdot Mirror
Seriously. Why should the customer (who is already paying out the ass already) have to suffer and pay more money?
Why isn't the solution for AT&T to improve their network?
(and honestly, it's not that bad, especially with a 3GS), it's only on occasion if you are in small extremely dense areas ....I live in Philly, and when the Phillies won the world series last year there was a parade. The entire city was on Broad st - that is one of the only times where there was a major problem - and that seemed to occur with other networks too....Other than that there have been times in small densely populated areas on Saturday nights where the web is slow or there are issues, but it's gotten a lot better.
If AT&T did what the author is suggesting then I would expect most of the customers who have purchsed Iphones exactly BECAUSE you can go online anytime to feel screwed...and screwing people who make you so much money, especially people who are very comfortable using the social features of the web..that's a bad idea.
Also, we're talking about mobile web usage, NOT people downloading binaires from newsgroups or torrents - the most demanding use is probably from people streaming music for pandora or streaming videos from youtube....Having a network support this and doing what AT&T needs to do to support the products they've sold and make SO much money off of monthly is the solution, it's the right solution, and it's the only real solution....So as I said, this guy can STFU.
I agree with you, but I would also add that I don't think capitalism is the right word for our system...
It certainly isn't pure captialism. What we have is a sort of soft fascism, a corporatism of protected markets. The markets aren't free, despite what people call them, they are protected and artificially controlled/manipulated - and that's not even getting into how corporate power is protected and government and corporations work together to get around regulation/law.
It's certainly not a great system for the majority of people and is getting worse by the day.
SO does the internet. Operations undertaken by highly trained and specialized intelligence units have found that there is atomic bomb data available on the internet, and thus far the INTERNET has REFUSED to allow inspections - additionally there are islamic radicals taking about jihad.
Whatever your worst nightmare is, the internet has it..There is only one option:
The INTERNET MUST BE LIBERATED (by bombs).
Don't let the warning come in the form of a mushroom cloud, (or lolcat suicide bombers).
That was not a made up story, though I wish it had been):
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/08/britain-to-put-cctv-cameras-inside-private-homes/
http://current.com/items/90587783_uk-plans-to-monitor-20-000-families-homes-via-cctv.htm
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/115736/Sin-bins-for-worst-families
I'm aware of the practical limitations and not suggesting that it would be a practical thing to compete with provider service now - but if there is ever a serious civil emergency (and I can think of several that are likely to happen at some point, unfortunately) something developed along these lines could be incredibly.
I can also see certain scenarios where something like this could develop over a period of time...Someone does a proof of concept, people who like to tinker start playing around, something gets developed and refined and then a use is found among a niche or subculture which later expands..you know what i'm getting at I'm sure.
I think the idea of decentralized communications is something that sounds great to a lot of people in this day and age....
I think this sort of decentralized network is a great idea - it's something we need to see more of, and has tons of uses.
Can you imagine if an application was released that created just such an "off of the network" mesh and would work with most phones and it caught on like Napster did? Can you imagine how the mobile providers would go apeshit if large groups of people circumvented their network and were able to communicate on their own?
What the fuck is going on over there?
Seriously, cameras in people's homes to make sure their kids are being "properly parented;" testing DNA at the border to determine ethnicity (and who knows what else, because what does race have to do with nationality these days)... Branding children as future criminals at age 5 based on hyperactive or normal anti-social kid behavior....and there's more that I can't even remember now.
England is becoming some nightmare 1984/Gattaca mashup...Brave New World indeed.
Google has a point; they never claimed those Google Apps are open source.
Maybe the work that he does to stay in compliance will provide a sort of "road map" for others in the future who wish to mod/hack so that they can do so without ending up being threatened legally, yet will still be able to provide their work to the community in a usable form that will allow the the mods to be easily installed without the user losing functionality they want.
I have to agree with everyone else who has stated that "outmaneuvering" is sensationalistic and not really accurate.
Depends on how you define glory, and I don't know if you're asking because you're considering entering, re-entering, or quitting the field....
If having career where there is a wide variety of different sorts of job opportunities available (if you have skills) appeals to you, then IT is good. If you can work well with others and can make technical concepts easy to understand for others who aren't as technical, then you have even more options...Like any other field, it all depends on the job.
It's a field where you can start your own business and be successful.
I guess my point is that "The IT Field" is HUGE. There are so many different types of jobs, so many different levels within the field...Most of them pay well, some of them pay ridiculous amounts if you're good. However, in most cases you have to pay your dues and get some experience before you get that great job; and it changes. You have to be able to adapt. There are some shit IT jobs too, but generally if you have the skills and experience you wont be stuck in one.
For most people in IT, maybe the type of glory they get is feeling good when they come up with a solution, or the type of glory you get when you bring a server that has gone down back online and people can work again and are thanking you for fixing it....but. then again, you could end up with a job somewhere really cool, with innovative work conditions and become part of a team that creates something useful that the whole world uses..I am sure some of people on various teams at Google probably feel that way - look at things like gmail or googlemaps.
Maybe you'll invent something new....I run the IT dept for a medical technology developer..We make a device that can detect serious chronic diseases before there are any symptoms, ...I feel good about that at times, but I wouldn't call it glory.
I would suggest that there are more practical considerations than glory. I always thought that people who wanted glory in their work environment more than anything else became cops or firemen or surgeons...but what do I know?
One thing I love about the field is that, so far it has provided me with a career, and the knowledge that I can go anywhere where there are computers and servers and make a living, even if it's freelancing until something better comes along. It's provided me the ability to make enough money to live very comfortably, and I like it. I like computers, I like tech and have played with computers and technology since getting an Apple ][ at age 8 (1980). I have worked in IT professionally since 1996 , and never have been unemployed since (unless I wanted to be for a brief period).
As far as obsolescence, I know why people think that...and while some positions may change or phase out over time due to things becoming more "end user friendly" - there will always be things that cannot be handled by the non-technical or amateurs, so no..I don't see obsolescence...only change - and if you stay on your toes, you can adapt.
WTF is up with the Australian government.
In the past decade (or a little more) the people of that country really seem to have lot a lot of their freedoms.....It's amazing how backward and wrongheaded their government's plans have been:
The people lost most of their gun rights.
The government goes apeshit over cartoons and charges a guy with a serious kiddie porn charge over a nude simpsons cartoon modificatiion.
The government will stop at nothing to be able to have wholesale filtering and censorship on the internet for everyone, despite the fact that massess of people took to the streets and protested and pretty much every high profile techie (who wasn't working towards the govt agenda) warned about sll of the problems (technical andd otherwise) inherent in doing this...I mean, come on - the fact that they think they'll be able to pull off an "unhackable" windows netbook technically is almost as ridiculous as the the plan itself is antithetic to a free society.
Who is advising these people? How ridiculous is this? And RFID chips install to boot?
I guess Australia is on it's way back to becoming the world's largest "island" (yes, I know, it's a continent) penal colony.
If this netwbook becomes a reality I can see the slashdot headlines from the day after it's release: "2 high school freshman were arrested in Australia; charged with hacking their unhackable netbook computers.." which I am sure this ignorant govt will make a major crime.
It's a good argument, but I would also say that there is a HUGE problem with the entire concept of "legal" and "Illegal" songs - obviously the industry groups like the RIAA want to make everything that isn't a new, direct purchase of a brand new album from a retailer (E.G. format shifting, sharing a CD with your mom, etc) illegal, but our culture and the law (in a lot of cases from what I can tell), would disagree.
It's clear that people doing egregious commercial piracy and selling bootleg copies of CDs you could purchase anywhere are illegal and should be.
But If we look at the day-to-day cases of what the RIAA would consider an "Illegal" song, like someone downloading an album which they have never purchased from an FTP site that belongs to someone they don't know - which laws are they breaking? Are they civil or criminal laws?
How does that equation change if, say, the files come from bittorrent and are an album that the person already owns (I do this a lot, with the fast connection I have it's easier for me to download stuff I already own and life than it is to rip it)?
I just think that with fair use and the state of the laws, it's not clear exactly what the legal status of a lot of this sort of stuff is, despite the attempts by industry groups to make everything seem illicit. The fact that they are trying to force materials into elementary schools to equate downloading music with theft of physical property is telling (and ridiculous); they are going after the kids trying to indoctrinate them at a young age, and are using the abuse of the legal system to financially intimidate people into settling their cases - which shouldn't be necessary if the legalities surrounding this are as cut and dried as they'd like the public to believe they are.
Thing is, my understanding is that he isn't very skilled. He ran a script that searched for default or blank passwords.
Unless the fix is simply to create a password, what could he do?
There is something very fishy about this sort of data being left unprotected like that.
That sounds good to me, fair enough...
The most interesting thing is what he found; he did actually find what he was looking for and then some, and as you alluded to in your post, he felt compelled to share it with the world.
While that may be naive, I think it shows that he wasn't mal intentioned. Obviously we cannot have people doing this, but given the subject and the lack of disclosure on the part of the government for so many years, it's understandable.
The government is embarrassed, the person responsible for those systems and their security should definitely be fired.
There were several drills occurring that very morning involving hijacked planes used as weapons and other scenarios that boggle the mind when you realize what happened.
Then there is Operation Bojinka (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bojinka_plot), which never really got off of the ground, but which was an operational plan ....That was from 1995, and those responsible for our security were well aware of that.
One thing I think everyone can agree on is that it was an awful day - but I think (unfortunately) that violence and terrorism will happen again. Regardless of its source, method, and motives - it's too effective; just like the political use of fear - it gets results.
What doesn't have to happen is that we don't have to give up who we are to get some supposed (false IMO) sense of "total safety" (which just doesn't exist)...but if you scare people enough for long enough they generally will capitulate.
I just think the entire notion of a color coded "Terror alert system" for the public is ridiculous.
Yes. Eternally staying vigilant against government abuses.
I am tired of government manipulation of the public via fear. There has always been terrorism, there always will be terrorism, and from what I can tell, a very high percentage it is state sponsored, in one way or the other.
Obviously we need military and intelligence services; they shouldbe the best in the world, and we need security - but what happened on Sept 11th is ridiculous and NEVER should have happened - all of this bullshit about all of these simultaneous coincedences letting this occur, as well as there being drills occurring at the WTC and Pentagon that very morning for THAT exact scenario (that's a fact by the way, not some truther conspiracy bullshit - look into it if you doubt that)...
I have no idea what really went on - but I just don't think that our country and the security of the people have been in the best hands. There is an article by Michael LeMieux called "Loss of Freedom" which I think sums up how I feel about the how the entire anti-terror laws situation in the US has been handled since 2001 quite well, here is an excerpt:
"On the Friday prior to voting on the PATRIOT Act, the Judiciary Committee passed a bipartisan version of the bill that did not have the broad sweeping powers wanted by Attorney General Ashcroft and the White House. At 3:45 am on Sunday the bill was printed; but it had been modified to include all the items of the original bill which, according to Rep. DeFazio from Oregon, were a direct challenge to our civil liberties. These same items had been rejected by Congress even before 9/11 occurred.
According to Rep. Barr, the PATRIOT Act was a device under the guise of fighting terrorism to expand federal police power. When we look at who attacked us, we see no U.S. citizens. Yet when we look at the PATRIOT Act, time and time again it provides the federal government with mechanisms to spy on the citizens of the United States, not on foreign terrorists. If the purpose of the PATRIOT Act is to aid in fighting the enemy, it has to make any rational person think, âoewho do they think is the enemy?â Obviously the government believes it is U. S. citizens. We have met the enemy, and it is us. "
The ignorance of the anti-gun people never fails to amaze me.
If the world could be completely disarmed, where all guns would cease to exist, and nobody would have them, period...Nobody. Then I might agree that it would be a good thing.
However, what you are advocating is ridiculous, because what you (and every other person who says similar stuff) are actually advocating, is that ONLY law abiding citizens should be unable to own firearms. Law abiding gun owners aren't the problem, the follow laws... They are the ones who sometimes stop crimes before the police arrive. They are the ones who have CCW permits and stop deranged sociopaths who are going on public murder sprees before they can kill or before they can kill as many people as they'd like to.
Since your argument doesn't provide some magic that actually causes all firearms to cease to exist, criminals will still have them, they don't respect or follow laws, and such laws actually bring them comfort because it lets them know that when they do commit their crime, (especially if it's in public) they don't have to worry about a good samaritan stopping them...
That's just the logic, without even getting into the constitutional/American heritage side of the issue.
Your statement is such a simplistic view that has nothing to do with reality, and it's never going to happen.
I agree with a bit of what you've said, but I totally disagree with the last two sentence in your post... and since you weren't there how would you know?
So what, you think this man is sitting in jail all of this time and wouldn't hand the password over to someone *just to be a dick*?
It is true that every place has politics, and that you have to be mindful of them, and sometimes the most technically gifted among us seem to (at times, but not everyone and not always) be short of the political and "working well with others" side of things, but none of that means he was all in the wrong, or that there isn't more to the story, or that the people who actually treated this like a pissing match and blew it all out of proportion aren't the ones who are really in the wrong here. Maybe it could have been handled differently, but maybe not....
Just because in a similar circumstance you or many other people might back down, doesn't mean he was wrong....I think he thought he was absolutely doing what was right and what was in the best interests of the city, I think that there were some things going on that shouldn't have been and he took a principled stand ..... The way he has been treated in court, the fact that 3 of the 4 changes have been dropped and the remaining charge is completely dubious and he *STILL* is being held with 5M bail tells me that something isn't right here...Even if he DID act like a total asshole (which I tend to think is not the case), that bail is still completely inappropriate.
I really don't think he'll have a hard time getting work after this. It's possible he won't be able to work for a municipality or certain corporations, but so what...
Lori Drew seems to be a disgusting and cruel harpy, but what happened to her had nothing to do with the rule of law or justice and everything to do with abusing the legal system to try to try punish her for many things that weren't crimes. Violating a website's TOS being de facto turned into a crime? Please...
The precedents this would have set (had it been allowed to stand) would have been horrible for everyone who loves anonymity on the internet (among other things).
It's so sad, what happened to Meghan Meier, but Lori Drew wasn't ultimately responsible for that - and it is my opinion that the people who think she was are the type of people who like to pass reactionary legislation without really looking at the full picture.
Now there is all sorts of bad state legislation flying around to keep an eye on.
I've had an app for a while that I use sometimes that provides an augmented reality experience; it's called "RJDJ Album" and it's pretty cool in that you fire it up and put on your headphones, and it's got several different "tracks" which are actually different audio filters and effects set up in a way to provide extremely cool, rhythmic and interesting "music" out of whatever the microphone picks up.
It may sound like something only a stoner would love, and it's definitely got that going for it - but it actually is a lot cooler and more fun then you might imagine. All of the "tracks" are different and many of them, instead of just being trippy or weird actually do create a sort of song - and it's never the same thing; some of them are very complex and rhythmic and sound like they could be off of an Aphex Twin album or something.
The instant art aspect of it is really cool - it would be interesting to see something visual that works in a similar way....
Anytime government or corporate behemoths talk about "fixing" something like the backbone or underlying structure of the internet they're generally looking to fix it to better serve their interests.
As many posts have already eloquently opined, these attempts can often be about control; the proposed changes can involve things most of us who support privacy, anonymity online and true network neutrality abhorr.
The internet will continue to evolve as it always has, and only in ways in which it needs to, if it stays as "ownerless" as it is now...to me, anything else, especially if it involves more beaurocracy or legislation or control being given to some body that isn't purely committed to an open, free internet, is dangerous.
Kind of like a crack or heroin dealer...they want you to keep playing.
The solution, clearly, is to switch to crack or heroin. Then, if it's taking up too much of your time or money you can go to rehab, and the game wont matter quite as much, because life will become a very interesting game where you'll gain lot of XP and have to deal with real world consequences if you screw up!!
Our "game" has a slammin hip-hop soundtrack and plenty of excessive violence; choose the "North Philadelphia" campaign for you newcomers, you'll get into to the action fast that way!
Look, I don't so much of an issue with the rest of your post, but IMO the statement below shows a clear misunderstanding of the socioeconomics, politics and culture in the areas where these things are occuring - it sounds nice, but means nothing in the real world.
" Simple way to reduce civilian casualties: The civilians stop ALLOWING the terrorists/enemy to hide amongst them, and they will stop dying."
It doesn't make much practical sense either, you're saying that the unarmed, downtrodden families are supposed to stop the armed ruthless thugs? Is that it?
That's like when someone who doesn't understand the drug issue talking about getting dealers off the streets:
"Hey, if the people who lived in north Philadelphia didn't allow drug sales to occur there'd be no drug sales in our neighborhood."
My point is that it's just not that simple.
DRAT!
Foiled by anonymity again....
But beware, you have violated the code of usenet, several rules of which are "never mention usenet," as well as promoting an indexing website that allows the uninitiated access to some of our secrets....and should the guild find you, well.....I don't think I have to tell YOU what will happen.
Wow...Disney has a vision of our corpatist future that seems scarily on the mark.....
Yeah, I feel the same way. The TV addicted sheeple are so willing to give up freedoms people gave so much for just to have the state tell them "we'll protect you."
It's pretty bad here, but the shit I hear coming out of your country makes me really feel bad for you guys.
I have always wanted to visit London so bad - every music biography I had read when I was younger made it seem so cool there, all of these great bands from the 60s on, punks fighting Thatcherism, etc, all of the historical stuff, it had always seemed like a very interesting city... ...Then I hear about 5 year olds being labelled as future criminals and put in databases, and police tactics, brutality and oversealous prosecutions being used against peaceful, cultured protesters that are the same as the stuff the police do here at times, cameras everywhere - total surveillance state, the anti-terror laws that have destroyed your civil liberties just as ours have destroyed ours - and now it seems there is a very definitive Orwellian "Big Brother" vibe going on there....
it's sad what is happening and has happened to our countries.