developing so-called peer-to-peer file-sharing techniques that are "friendly" to Internet service providers." If you'd give us data detailing how your network is set up and IP addresses are allocated, we (OSS in general, but specifically uTorrent, Azureus, Transmission, etc) would be perfectly happy to do this for free. It's a win-win - expensive uploads stay (increasingly) in your network, the customer (no, not advertisers - the subscriber) gets better speeds, and you don't get your asses handed to you for investing in an OBVIOUS COPYRIGHT CIRCUMVENTION TECHNOLOGY!!!111!1!
And the GP comment (don't take it personally) shows why the world is laughing at the US cellphone market.
Swapping your regular, subscriber SIM for a pay-as-you-go SIM when you get off the train in your destination isn't even a technical task in Europe. It's just what you do - walk in to a O2 or Orange store, grab a PAYG SIM and slap £20 of minutes on there
I did it when I went to London from the States, worked great. I paid a grand total of the £50 - while my parents paid $600 in roaming.
Your second bit is also weird. How many CP cases are NOT at the federal level? It's a federal felony, no?
So a base of 1700. Let's quadruple that and be conservative.
That's still under 8000 *a year*. Subtract out of that the healthy fraction that aren't really child porn but more 17yo on 17yo sharing between them (they abused each other!!!)
Also subtract a significant number of people who are parts of botnets... if a botnet is running on your computer, it's almost unprovable that you actually did anything
You're left with (liberal estimate) 5K cases a year... for $1B?????
An even better approach would be to have just a Windows partition. Then do your real work under Linux by booting from a memory stick. If you want to get really paranoid, you could keep all of your sensitive data on a separate, encrypted memory stick, camera memory card ("hidden" in your camera), phone memory card ("hidden" in your phone), etc.
Most-paranoid-ever plan: FDE your drive. Keep your encryption keys and GRUB on a MicroSD card. If the card is in the computer, it boots normally. Wire up your cellphone to shutdown your computer (killswitch) - not too hard with a SSH client. Keep your MicroSD card on you at all times unless you are booting the computer. It doesn't need to be in to run.
Nasty stuff comes up, you can... hide the microSD card on your person. And you can dispose of it without much trouble (think swallowing it/hiding in your bellybutton or ear canal, and a toilet in the holding cell)
I think the crux of this argument is that you're not so much leaving it on your desk as 'advertising' it to the world. If you share a copyrighted song on LimeWire/etc, you're basically saying 'here, take my iPod and copy all the songs!'.
It's not a transfer, it's a duplication. The duplication doesn't occur until the download... MediaSentry finds the share ('making available', currently legal) and downloads it.
IANAL
The question is, can MediaSentry break copyright? Or are they an authorized agent of the copyright holder (RIAA labels)?
I'd say that, as they are being paid by RIAA for this explicit purpose, they are being paid by the copyright holder to violate copyright.
I'd say that makes MediaSentry an authorized agent of the RIAA and labels, and de facto can not infringe.
Of course, they (MediaSentry) could pay some guy to download files and send IP's to them - but that makes Joe here an agent to the agent, and (probably) can't violate copyright either.
So trace data (which will be encrypted, probably) would need to be obtained... which would require more substantial work than getting a billing address (hopefully)
It doesn't make sense, logically - if MediaSentry can download it, so can everybody else - but they can't prove that anybody else is. Hell, the reports of up/download by other clients could be ghosting by the tracker for all the law knows. But that's how law works.
And they have yet to prove that the file(s) were infringing, e.x. the song "Britney Spears - Poison.mp3" is really that (awful) song and not some guy making a loud, wet fart into his (poor) mic.
Of course, I could be talking out my ass. In which case, feel free to strike me down... but I sure hope I'm right.
He claims he didn't download the game and didn't have it on his computer.
If he actually did fire up BitTorrent and download the game, he'd probably be better off just dropping the 600 and being done with it.
But, as it is, they claim 'forensic evidence' without having access to his computer... I call bullshit. And, the UK has some fairly strict data-protection laws - if he wanted to fight this, he could get the video-game case thrown out (bad evidence) and make the ISP his bitch for giving up his info without a court order.
But I think they're bluffing. If he actually downloaded a game, you'd expect them to actually deal with significant damages like the RIAA, not so small that it's easier to pay.
The case is a vague 'you downloaded the game and we have 'proof', now pay us £600 to go away' That's extortion, and probably blackmail.
Only on Slashdot. If you look at adoption rates, you'll see Vista is doing just fine. It's already 10% of the market (as told by website logs), and growing. Let's assume those numbers are accurate and not biased. It's likely less - developers using Vista on a VM or something.
Anyways, it's been a fucking year and a half. If we assume every new (wintel) computer purchase has Vista on it... that's only 10% of the population buying a new computer in a year and a half.
That averages out to a 15 year lifespan...
You'd think it should be much, much, much, much higher. I know a lot of people (majority) that replace their computer every 5 years, and I imagine that's pretty common. So that should be something like 1.5/5, or 30% of the population is replacing their computers. If they were getting Vista, wouldn't that be a 30% and over?
Those results don't include upgrades, only 'natural growth'. That suggests that: 1) People aren't upgrading their computers (they don't need to?) 2) Vista sucks, and a lot of people are getting XP instead of Vista on their new computer.
I think it's a mix of both. Keep in mind that 5 years ago was 2003, and really is approaching the lifetime of a PC.
Perhaps, but if I was a victim of baby-rape or something, I'd be much more concerned with... y'know, the abuse. If I could move past that, and get my life sorted out, I'd be a faceless person in a video that no more than about 100 people saw... 20 years ago.
Of course it gets creepy if anybody distributes their pics with the full name of the victim, but I can't help but feel that nobody still 'on the loose' has been that stupid.
There was a tool (I think) for doing this back with 0.5
The big fucking problem with that is, by removing stuff, you are de facto accepting the rest of it. And all that responsibility.
As it is, it's encrypted so you can't easily see what it is. You can if you want, but it will screw you over if they pull you in for questioning ('you removed x, x, and x - but you left these pirated MP3's or secret plans for missles', etc. God forbid you let some child-porn slip through...)
So you have a tradeoff. Run the program and get total anonymity, while having your hard-drive used for a bunch of random encrypted binary files, the contents of which are completely unknown to you, or use the non-anonymous internet and be tracked and culpable. If that doesn't bother you, it sure is faster.
But if you're a Chinese dissenter, or a government leaker, or (gasp!) a pedophile, that's a trade-off you agree to.
N.B. I don't get the big deal about pedophiles - there's a difference between a pedophile (viewer) and a child-abuser (the source of the pics). The argument in the past has been that they're encouraging the creation of more CP.... but especially on Freenet, nobody knows how popular your stuff is. So what's the big deal with a bunch of fat creepy guys looking at pics of little girls? They aren't actually doing anything, they're just fucking strange... Seriously, the damage is done and the pics exist. Unless it can be shown that a seedy guy in his 50's looking at preteen girls in swimsuits is significantly more likely to actually do something in The Real World, I don't get it.
(It's a serious question, by the way - and before I'm crucified by anybody, pedophiles are fucking weird, and child-abusers/baby-rapers are seriously screwed up in the head. I'm just talking about reason, not defending them.)
Well.... I'm not gonna flame you, but you're not 100% correct
Basically, the entire POINT of a darknet is you don't connect to the FBI nodes. You connect to the nodes of close, close friends and so on. It's like the Kevin Bacon game, carried out to about 50 iterations or so - hopefully you can get to everything you want, that's a lot of people.
So the FBI nodes don't get connected to because you have spent significant face-time with your good buddies and decided to connect on Freenet, and they did the same with the rest of their friends and so on.
Yeah, right. Not nearly enough people are using it. Not even remotely.
So you could hop on an IRC channel and trade noderefs insecurely, or have a bot do it for you. Which is sub-optimal...
So they re-implemented Opennet. So it's all a matter of preference, and at this point there's no compelling reason for 0.5
Fortunately or not, the NYT has survived through at least 2 major shifts in party goals and constituencies (at least the New Deal and Reagan)
They are a better definition of moderate than any other group I can come up with, mainly because they're a single anchor point. Everything else is (more) open to question.
And conservatives (especially neo-cons) have a poor habit of reading the truth about a situation and claiming it's liberally biased...
Mmmm. So you're one of those people conflating a fucking tiny minority of a group to be the whole group?
That's like me considering every conservative to be an Ann Coulter, or every black person a gangbanging pimp rapper, or every Asian an ultracompetitive smartsss. Or every Muslim (there are BILLIONS) a clit-cutting polygamist stinky enslaving bastard?
I think the word you're looking for is fundamentalist, and I hate to break it to you, but Christan fundamentalists are every bit as scary.
Or you could code only for Windows/Mac/Linux, write your own library, and go open source. ...? wxWidgets - accomplishing three 'negatives' simultaneously!
No, seriously, what did you mean? wxWidgets allows you to close-source a program with it?
Slashdot Mirror
Mmkay? It's not that hard
hah
... with a link to Cringley
never thought I'd see somebody complaining about Gartner
haha
what use is a phone call if you are ... unable ... to ... speak?
And the GP comment (don't take it personally) shows why the world is laughing at the US cellphone market.
Swapping your regular, subscriber SIM for a pay-as-you-go SIM when you get off the train in your destination isn't even a technical task in Europe. It's just what you do - walk in to a O2 or Orange store, grab a PAYG SIM and slap £20 of minutes on there
I did it when I went to London from the States, worked great. I paid a grand total of the £50 - while my parents paid $600 in roaming.
I really do love that sentence.
It's GSM - which is about a decade old and is the same thing, except it also works across networks, countries, and even continents.
Whereas Verizon is only a pillar of freedom... on Verizon. And in the States.
Wow... that got modded up...
I might be wrong - don't hesitate to tell me if I am!
I call bullshit.
You don't have *any* numbers for the first bit.
Your second bit is also weird. How many CP cases are NOT at the federal level? It's a federal felony, no?
So a base of 1700. Let's quadruple that and be conservative.
That's still under 8000 *a year*. Subtract out of that the healthy fraction that aren't really child porn but more 17yo on 17yo sharing between them (they abused each other!!!)
Also subtract a significant number of people who are parts of botnets... if a botnet is running on your computer, it's almost unprovable that you actually did anything
You're left with (liberal estimate) 5K cases a year... for $1B?????
IAS(till)NAL
Mediasentry can't infringe, ever. They are (by the business deal they have with music labels) authorized to use the copyright.
It's not infringement for anybody.
An even better approach would be to have just a Windows partition. Then do your real work under Linux by booting from a memory stick. If you want to get really paranoid, you could keep all of your sensitive data on a separate, encrypted memory stick, camera memory card ("hidden" in your camera), phone memory card ("hidden" in your phone), etc.
Most-paranoid-ever plan:FDE your drive.
Keep your encryption keys and GRUB on a MicroSD card. If the card is in the computer, it boots normally.
Wire up your cellphone to shutdown your computer (killswitch) - not too hard with a SSH client.
Keep your MicroSD card on you at all times unless you are booting the computer. It doesn't need to be in to run.
Nasty stuff comes up, you can
I think the crux of this argument is that you're not so much leaving it on your desk as 'advertising' it to the world. If you share a copyrighted song on LimeWire/etc, you're basically saying 'here, take my iPod and copy all the songs!'.
It's not a transfer, it's a duplication. The duplication doesn't occur until the download... MediaSentry finds the share ('making available', currently legal) and downloads it.
IANAL
The question is, can MediaSentry break copyright? Or are they an authorized agent of the copyright holder (RIAA labels)?
IANAL, but I play one from my armchair.
I'd say that, as they are being paid by RIAA for this explicit purpose, they are being paid by the copyright holder to violate copyright.
I'd say that makes MediaSentry an authorized agent of the RIAA and labels, and de facto can not infringe.
Of course, they (MediaSentry) could pay some guy to download files and send IP's to them - but that makes Joe here an agent to the agent, and (probably) can't violate copyright either.
So trace data (which will be encrypted, probably) would need to be obtained... which would require more substantial work than getting a billing address (hopefully)
It doesn't make sense, logically - if MediaSentry can download it, so can everybody else - but they can't prove that anybody else is. Hell, the reports of up/download by other clients could be ghosting by the tracker for all the law knows. But that's how law works.
And they have yet to prove that the file(s) were infringing, e.x. the song "Britney Spears - Poison.mp3" is really that (awful) song and not some guy making a loud, wet fart into his (poor) mic.
Of course, I could be talking out my ass. In which case, feel free to strike me down... but I sure hope I'm right.
100% agree.
Keep in mind that Microsoft Research != Microsoft
One is evil(tm), the other is not.
That's called winegcc, I think. Basically you code your apps to work on Wine and compile it to a native application using that.
Either Google Earth or Picasa (or both) do that.
He claims he didn't download the game and didn't have it on his computer.
If he actually did fire up BitTorrent and download the game, he'd probably be better off just dropping the 600 and being done with it.
But, as it is, they claim 'forensic evidence' without having access to his computer... I call bullshit. And, the UK has some fairly strict data-protection laws - if he wanted to fight this, he could get the video-game case thrown out (bad evidence) and make the ISP his bitch for giving up his info without a court order.
But I think they're bluffing. If he actually downloaded a game, you'd expect them to actually deal with significant damages like the RIAA, not so small that it's easier to pay.
The case is a vague 'you downloaded the game and we have 'proof', now pay us £600 to go away'
That's extortion, and probably blackmail.
Anyways, it's been a fucking year and a half. If we assume every new (wintel) computer purchase has Vista on it... that's only 10% of the population buying a new computer in a year and a half.
That averages out to a 15 year lifespan...
You'd think it should be much, much, much, much higher. I know a lot of people (majority) that replace their computer every 5 years, and I imagine that's pretty common. So that should be something like 1.5/5, or 30% of the population is replacing their computers. If they were getting Vista, wouldn't that be a 30% and over?
Those results don't include upgrades, only 'natural growth'. That suggests that:
1) People aren't upgrading their computers (they don't need to?)
2) Vista sucks, and a lot of people are getting XP instead of Vista on their new computer.
I think it's a mix of both. Keep in mind that 5 years ago was 2003, and really is approaching the lifetime of a PC.
Eh... give it a shot, download it, give it a couple gig's, enable UPnP and let it run for a day or two
It's actually not that bad. Though, to be fair, I haven't found any reason to actually use it.
Chuck Norris. Of course, he can pre-emptively censor, with his roundhouse punch. Prevents you from even thinking the offending thought.
Now that's safety!
Perhaps, but if I was a victim of baby-rape or something, I'd be much more concerned with... y'know, the abuse. If I could move past that, and get my life sorted out, I'd be a faceless person in a video that no more than about 100 people saw... 20 years ago.
Of course it gets creepy if anybody distributes their pics with the full name of the victim, but I can't help but feel that nobody still 'on the loose' has been that stupid.
There was a tool (I think) for doing this back with 0.5
The big fucking problem with that is, by removing stuff, you are de facto accepting the rest of it. And all that responsibility.
As it is, it's encrypted so you can't easily see what it is. You can if you want, but it will screw you over if they pull you in for questioning ('you removed x, x, and x - but you left these pirated MP3's or secret plans for missles', etc. God forbid you let some child-porn slip through...)
So you have a tradeoff. Run the program and get total anonymity, while having your hard-drive used for a bunch of random encrypted binary files, the contents of which are completely unknown to you, or use the non-anonymous internet and be tracked and culpable. If that doesn't bother you, it sure is faster.
But if you're a Chinese dissenter, or a government leaker, or (gasp!) a pedophile, that's a trade-off you agree to.
N.B. I don't get the big deal about pedophiles - there's a difference between a pedophile (viewer) and a child-abuser (the source of the pics). The argument in the past has been that they're encouraging the creation of more CP.... but especially on Freenet, nobody knows how popular your stuff is. So what's the big deal with a bunch of fat creepy guys looking at pics of little girls? They aren't actually doing anything, they're just fucking strange... Seriously, the damage is done and the pics exist. Unless it can be shown that a seedy guy in his 50's looking at preteen girls in swimsuits is significantly more likely to actually do something in The Real World, I don't get it.
(It's a serious question, by the way - and before I'm crucified by anybody, pedophiles are fucking weird, and child-abusers/baby-rapers are seriously screwed up in the head. I'm just talking about reason, not defending them.)
Well.... I'm not gonna flame you, but you're not 100% correct
Basically, the entire POINT of a darknet is you don't connect to the FBI nodes. You connect to the nodes of close, close friends and so on. It's like the Kevin Bacon game, carried out to about 50 iterations or so - hopefully you can get to everything you want, that's a lot of people.
So the FBI nodes don't get connected to because you have spent significant face-time with your good buddies and decided to connect on Freenet, and they did the same with the rest of their friends and so on.
Yeah, right. Not nearly enough people are using it. Not even remotely.
So you could hop on an IRC channel and trade noderefs insecurely, or have a bot do it for you. Which is sub-optimal...
So they re-implemented Opennet. So it's all a matter of preference, and at this point there's no compelling reason for 0.5
Eh... perhaps that person isn't such a moderate.
Fortunately or not, the NYT has survived through at least 2 major shifts in party goals and constituencies (at least the New Deal and Reagan)
They are a better definition of moderate than any other group I can come up with, mainly because they're a single anchor point. Everything else is (more) open to question.
And conservatives (especially neo-cons) have a poor habit of reading the truth about a situation and claiming it's liberally biased...
Mmmm. So you're one of those people conflating a fucking tiny minority of a group to be the whole group?
That's like me considering every conservative to be an Ann Coulter, or every black person a gangbanging pimp rapper, or every Asian an ultracompetitive smartsss. Or every Muslim (there are BILLIONS) a clit-cutting polygamist stinky enslaving bastard?
I think the word you're looking for is fundamentalist, and I hate to break it to you, but Christan fundamentalists are every bit as scary.
What, as opposed to:
All TV news (including CNN, NBC and especially FOX, but perhaps excluding PBS)
Most other papers
Most people
Every other politician?
No, they aren't perfect, but they've been around for a fucking long time, and been respected for almost ALL of it.
Or is this another 'that darn press! telling things the way they are...grrr' response?
wxWidgets - accomplishing three 'negatives' simultaneously!
No, seriously, what did you mean? wxWidgets allows you to close-source a program with it?