Dude, I've been married for over thirty years and have never been able to get my wife into gaming... unless it was "Bubbles" on her iPhone or a simple solitary type game. She just has no desire to play and/or sees it as too much work. It is not fun for her at all; needless to say I am the exact opposite.
ok, so what is the legal presidence here? I am guessing that you are allowed to fly over private property.... airlines and private planes do that all the time (higher altitude, mind you). but it can't be legal to shoot one out of the air; would this even cover a drone?
Death may well be in the future, but it will not happen in a year or two. VoIP still has some maturing to do... lots in fact. Voice demands just aren't the same as data.
On top of that, you just don't replace a Central Office or a large business PBX overnight. Tons (more than you can even imagine) of planning is required even before the first circuit is swapped out. Implementation of that plan is still another time intensive issue. A press release is only the begining of the process.
The packet switching announced may not even look like you expect. It can take many forms. If it works too much different (from the subscriber's point of view) than the current system in place, it will be a tough adjustment. Most people never know if they are talking over fiber or copper. How can you tell? As long as your call sounds clear and gets through, no one cares. The Technology behind that has been changing for decades, most are cluesless about how a call is connected or what technology is behind it. When that change comes, you are not going to know if you are on a Circuit or Packet switch.
Technology evolves, there is not question about that, but the Telecom industry is not the like the computer industry, though. One Central Office supplies service to thousands of lines. Even if VoIP was mature enough today, it will take traditional circuit switching years to be swapped out - it may well be many many years before you can declare traditional circuit switching a corpse.
Ok, I've been hearing that Circuit Switching is dead for a few years now, but I don't see any technology mature enough to take it's place. Mind you, packet switching is great technology, it's just not mature enough to replace what we have in place. That time has not yet come.
When it comes to dial tone, whenever you pick up that phone, you expect to get it - period. We get very annoyed if connection drops or we can't hear anyone on the other end, no matter where we call. The exception to this of course is our wireless calls. It is still a relatively new technology and so we put up with it. We are willing to hang up and retry the call if we get a bad connection. Sometimes we even wait until we get in a new cell on the network, or wait until we get back to a wired phone. The technology is not that dependable yet.
Neither is packet switching. You have already begin to hear of the technology replacing circuit switching on occasion, but we are a ways off from massive replacement of traditional circuit switching. Just as it took a while for electronic switches to mature enough to replace the mechanical ones, so to will this technology have to mature. We are not talking about replacing a few PCs on a network. The Telecom industry moves quite a bit slower. Public expectation is just too great. No, you are going to except that dial tone to be there every time you pick up that phone; even while they are replacing the switch...
"...that backdoors in crypto would do exactly nothing against this kind of well executed operation."
This is nothing more than politicains making a name for themselves or perhaps simply trying to get some legislation through that would never pass in a normal climate.
Having said that, it is even more important that those who are "knowledgeable," lobby Capital Hill directly. Perhaps some education of the public is nessasary, but most don't or won't care one bit. Heck, I bet that most people who use computers every day at work or home have never even used encryption software. Which of course, is a whole other topic of discussion.
It would then be possible for one to gain access to everything encrypted - including terrorist. And we still would not have the advantage that this type of lesgislation is attempting.
The argument that we should have backdoors on everything crypto, is very simular to the logic "we should ban guns to keep the public safe." The problem of course, is that the criminal still has a gun, and you are unable to defend yourself.
Thinking with their heart? Most Americans are technically challenged. But yes, even if it was explained to them, would they understand the real consequences? Not in this climate.
There are 2 obsticals preventing anything but a witch hunt here. Terrorism may have indeed struck agian...
Slashdot Mirror
Dude, I've been married for over thirty years and have never been able to get my wife into gaming... unless it was "Bubbles" on her iPhone or a simple solitary type game. She just has no desire to play and/or sees it as too much work. It is not fun for her at all; needless to say I am the exact opposite.
well, it makes tracking cell phones a touch less accurate.
When you consider that a criminal will also monitor police radios as well.
True enough, although I am not sure it was over the property just yet.. It seems that lots of legal issues are under question here.
ok, so what is the legal presidence here? I am guessing that you are allowed to fly over private property.... airlines and private planes do that all the time (higher altitude, mind you). but it can't be legal to shoot one out of the air; would this even cover a drone?
Death may well be in the future, but it will not happen in a year or two. VoIP still has some maturing to do... lots in fact. Voice demands just aren't the same as data.
On top of that, you just don't replace a Central Office or a large business PBX overnight. Tons (more than you can even imagine) of planning is required even before the first circuit is swapped out. Implementation of that plan is still another time intensive issue. A press release is only the begining of the process.
The packet switching announced may not even look like you expect. It can take many forms. If it works too much different (from the subscriber's point of view) than the current system in place, it will be a tough adjustment. Most people never know if they are talking over fiber or copper. How can you tell? As long as your call sounds clear and gets through, no one cares. The Technology behind that has been changing for decades, most are cluesless about how a call is connected or what technology is behind it. When that change comes, you are not going to know if you are on a Circuit or Packet switch.
Technology evolves, there is not question about that, but the Telecom industry is not the like the computer industry, though. One Central Office supplies service to thousands of lines. Even if VoIP was mature enough today, it will take traditional circuit switching years to be swapped out - it may well be many many years before you can declare traditional circuit switching a corpse.
Ok, I've been hearing that Circuit Switching is dead for a few years now, but I don't see any technology mature enough to take it's place. Mind you, packet switching is great technology, it's just not mature enough to replace what we have in place. That time has not yet come.
When it comes to dial tone, whenever you pick up that phone, you expect to get it - period. We get very annoyed if connection drops or we can't hear anyone on the other end, no matter where we call. The exception to this of course is our wireless calls. It is still a relatively new technology and so we put up with it. We are willing to hang up and retry the call if we get a bad connection. Sometimes we even wait until we get in a new cell on the network, or wait until we get back to a wired phone. The technology is not that dependable yet.
Neither is packet switching. You have already begin to hear of the technology replacing circuit switching on occasion, but we are a ways off from massive replacement of traditional circuit switching. Just as it took a while for electronic switches to mature enough to replace the mechanical ones, so to will this technology have to mature. We are not talking about replacing a few PCs on a network. The Telecom industry moves quite a bit slower. Public expectation is just too great. No, you are going to except that dial tone to be there every time you pick up that phone; even while they are replacing the switch...
I agree with what I believe is your main point -
"...that backdoors in crypto would do exactly nothing against this kind of well executed operation."
This is nothing more than politicains making a name for themselves or perhaps simply trying to get some legislation through that would never pass in a normal climate.
Having said that, it is even more important that those who are "knowledgeable," lobby Capital Hill directly. Perhaps some education of the public is nessasary, but most don't or won't care one bit. Heck, I bet that most people who use computers every day at work or home have never even used encryption software. Which of course, is a whole other topic of discussion.
Perhaps not, but consider this..
It would then be possible for one to gain access to everything encrypted - including terrorist. And we still would not have the advantage that this type of lesgislation is attempting.
The argument that we should have backdoors on everything crypto, is very simular to the logic "we should ban guns to keep the public safe." The problem of course, is that the criminal still has a gun, and you are unable to defend yourself.
Thinking with their heart? Most Americans are technically challenged. But yes, even if it was explained to them, would they understand the real consequences? Not in this climate.
There are 2 obsticals preventing anything but a witch hunt here. Terrorism may have indeed struck agian...