I'm not sure I understand your point... your Linux system can be infected in a similar manner-/etc/hosts functions the same as c:\windows\system32\drivers\etc\hosts. The DNSChanger Trojan targets Windows, though. Windows also asks permission before you perform administrative tasks, just like Linux- but many Windows users are already an Administrator, so they are not asked to log in again. It would be similar to you using "root" as your Linux login (no need to "su" to install). You can edit/etc/hosts with a text editor as root and redirect your system to these rogue DNS servers if you want.
This is what I fear... right now, though dictators can oppress Internet access for their "citizens", people in other nations can speak out against that dictatorship without fear of attack. If we made an "International Body" to oversee the Internet, ran by such dictators, other people can't speak up for the oppressed- it would be censored. The reason networks like Tor can route information is because it is free in some countries, and not in others. This idea, giving control of the Internet to the UN, will effectively kill (for the time being) freedom on the Internet.
I wonder, with this lawsuit gaining ground recently, did Proview not realize that Apple has been using the iPad trademark for years until now? And this started up around the same time as Apple was investigating conditions at its component manufacturer's sites and popular media jumped on the story. Is this China's way of retaliating to Apple and the US media? I find it hard to think that a Chinese corporation could sue Apple without the involvement the Party.
Bad analogy? It was, I admit it. What is happening today is a precursor to the end of the current library model, though. We already see this with the ebook market- publishers need to decide if their works can be lent or not on Barnes & Noble (I own a Nook, so that's what I'm familiar with). Many books cannot be lent.
Other media companies (movies, music, and gaming is starting as well) are doing their best to eliminate the second-hand markets, and to end sharing of the media with others. Academic book publishers do this by making a new edition every year or two, many times with few changes, so that the used textbook's lifespan is short. "Traditional" book publishers are / will be looking for a way to monetize their product's lifespan as well- whether it is a licensing fee libraries pay for each book checked out or higher costs for books that libraries purchase.
My initial post may have been a bad analogy, but only time will tell. The safe bet is the publishers will find a way to remain profitable, and communities like mine will continue to reduce the number of libraries and associated services.
I've heard of these buildings, many even publicly sponsored, where books are shared, and one does not need to pay the publisher for the privilege of reading their work. I propose these houses of corruption be banned, so they stop stealing from the coffers of the rich!
At both health centers where I live, all employees are required to receive the flu vaccine, or they will be shamed into termination. Shame includes wearing a facemask at all times while working, poor performance reviews, and they will not receive any pay increases (yes, this was all spelled out in memos to the staff).
He may have been armed, but one thing that stuck with me was this quote from New Zealand Detective Inspector Grant Wormald (source here):
"Police arrived in two marked Police helicopters... Despite our staff clearly identifying themselves..."
Reading between the lines, and from observing pictures released to the Press of the raid, the vehicles and officers on the ground were clad in black. For all Kim Dotcom knew, he was under attack by terrorists pretending to be police. He had to look away from the vehicles, people, and guns, just to find one marked vehicle which indicated a Police operation. And that vehicle was high above him.
This is Round 2 of SOPA and PIPA- not-as-high-profile sites (such as Reddit) are going to get "shut down" on the guise of "protecting the children", to reduce public knowledge of censorship in the future. These guys are out to discredit Reddit as a whole, not remove a couple of groups. Makes me wonder about Slashdot's "abuse flag"- did the moderator program suck so much, and who forced that to happen?
According to Marietje Schaake, a Dutch member of the European Parliament, the problems with the agreement appeared at the start of the process, when too many things were swept under the ACTA umbrella.
“The agreement is seeking to address a number of very different issues of which some are serious problems of public health and public safety, for example trade in fake medicine,” Ms. Schaake said. “But that issue doesn’t compare to the alleged cost to society of online piracy. It seeks to kill 20 birds with one stone. It risks not solving the legitimate concerns but causing incredible collateral damage.”
She is stating that ACTA, while started with "good intentions" (such as to stop counterfeit drug trade), grew in scope beyond what it was meant to be. The MAFFIA jumped on the bandwagon and included their 0.02 cents worth (yes, it is less valuable than my 2 cent's worth). She says that online piracy is nowhere near the problem that requires a solution such as ACTA- and that counterfeit pharmaceuticals are a problem that have serious (and real) consequences.
That happened to me years ago as well. I think the idea there is if the instructor used the same book for a couple years, at least the web content could be made to expire and the publisher could make more money. In the end, I bought the used Biology book and the full-price website subscription.
Our educational system seems to be making progress in this area. When the success of schools and teachers depends on student test scores, and not what the student achieves later in life, we've already dumbed down the populace. Now, to be "successful" or "smart", you only need to look good on paper. Who cares about real-world knowledge.
No, I don't think it's a big sham by politicians. For many of them, their campaigns (and wealth) relies on RIAA/MPAA and other SOPA/PIPA/ACTA supporters contributions. If it was a ploy to take Hollywood money, I think Hollywood would have figured it out before now. We're at a tipping point in World / US history- change is coming (and not the false Change of Obama). What we are observing is people, and politicians as the people's proxy, saying enough is enough.
I think a good analogy for DNS is the phone book: suppose your friend is gay or lesbian, and use the Yellow Book to find services that cater to their needs. However, the local churches petition Yellow Book to stop advertising such establishments. Unless your friend knows where to find a different phone book, they won't be able to find said services. However, the services didn't cease to exist or move.
That is what the law's DNS provisions did- they didn't stop anyone who knew of alternate DNS servers to access.
As for the destructiveness of the other parts of the law- point to the cell phone manufacturer sue-party going on right now, the "John Doe" mass suing pursued by the *IAAs, and Righthaven's actions. If your friend still feels that Righthaven was right to take down content used under the "Fair Use" provisions, then they will never learn (until it's too late). When that happens, I'm sure they'll ask you about alternate DNS and Tor.
I wouldn't be surprised if that is how it went (I won't RTFA yet- better to just jump to conclusions)- young rap group makes song, big rap group (signed to Universal) says "Cool, can we use that for a project?", young rap groups says yes because of exposure, and Universal proceeds to claim sole copyright on the song.
I think part of the problem is no one knows that ACTA is, exactly. My understanding when ACTA came to a year ago was that different versions were released so they could track who leaked ACTA.
So I would assume the FBI motivation is more on these lines as the likelihood of social media sites can get legally shutdown.
I recall that as well. Maybe the FBI doesn't want to shut it down, though- by passively monitoring, they can determine where the next gathering point will be. If they were to shut it down, another method of communication (not as readily intercepted) would be used rather quickly. It would probably take protestors time to learn which services (or accounts) were compromised and, by selectively targeting demonstrations, they (the FBI) could further obfuscate the data source.
I think Symantec handled this ok, when Anon stated they had the source code last week Symantec issued a statement about what they had, mainly 2006 code.
Personally, I would feel better if Symantec could come out and say, "You know, Anon does have the source code that was stolen from us in 2006, but we've patched those vulnerabilities over the last 5 years. All of our products, including pcAnywhere, are secure and reliable."
I know that Symantec says the rest of the products are safe- I just wonder why it couldn't be "all" products.
The source was stole in 2006. This means that they corrected the problems in their other products which had stolen source, but not pcAnywhere. For 5-6 years, Symantec has been selling software which was potentially compromised.
The current reported theft happened recently, but that source code came from a theft (unreported by Symantec, but known) back in 2006. That means, since 2006, Symantec has known the pcAnywhere source was stolen, knew of vulnerabilities, and chose not to fix that product. It sounds like they patched the rest of their products, though.
I don't think it makes sense, but they are just saying, hey Amazon, you can't sell a book created with our tool, since you aren't paying for it. If this new iBooks Editor becomes the defacto standard for eBook publishing, then thats worth a lot of money. But they are probably just trying to keep competitors from stealing the look and feel of their products too easily. I think that they will forget about it and let it loose when they realize its not a bad thing to let more people become experts in their software to publish in their channel
Emphasis mine... there is a lot of thinking in there. Are you one of Apple's lawyers? Apple didn't do this to share freely with the world- they see a market opportunity (eBooks on iPads since every school wants to get on the "iPad for every child!" bandwagon), they see a fanbase who unconditionally believes in them ("I think Apple will only do good with this eBook format!"), and they've identified a gap in the current tools (eBook publishing isn't as easy for Grandma yet).
Apple doesn't write EULAs for fun or as "busy work" for legal interns. There is intent behind those words.
I was surprised i got an actual email back from my senator saying he had taken his name off the bill and promising to vote against it so he must have got enough nasty hate mail to get spooked as you usually just get a standard "Please vote for me!" bullshit chain letter begging for more cash.
I heard back from my House Representative first, with a form letter reply that didn't address my specific concerns with SOPA. My reaction was to reply to the email, and the message has not been able to clear my outbox. I'm pissed at him, and am seriously considering running against him.
I heard back from one Senator, with another form letter. He also failed to address my specific concerns, but it took him 3 days to respond and he didn't support PIPA in then end (for now). For him... I'll just vote for someone else. He's lost my vote.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not sure I understand your point... your Linux system can be infected in a similar manner- /etc/hosts functions the same as c:\windows\system32\drivers\etc\hosts. The DNSChanger Trojan targets Windows, though. Windows also asks permission before you perform administrative tasks, just like Linux- but many Windows users are already an Administrator, so they are not asked to log in again. It would be similar to you using "root" as your Linux login (no need to "su" to install). You can edit /etc/hosts with a text editor as root and redirect your system to these rogue DNS servers if you want.
The problem is, the UN could be worse.
This is what I fear... right now, though dictators can oppress Internet access for their "citizens", people in other nations can speak out against that dictatorship without fear of attack. If we made an "International Body" to oversee the Internet, ran by such dictators, other people can't speak up for the oppressed- it would be censored. The reason networks like Tor can route information is because it is free in some countries, and not in others. This idea, giving control of the Internet to the UN, will effectively kill (for the time being) freedom on the Internet.
I wonder, with this lawsuit gaining ground recently, did Proview not realize that Apple has been using the iPad trademark for years until now? And this started up around the same time as Apple was investigating conditions at its component manufacturer's sites and popular media jumped on the story. Is this China's way of retaliating to Apple and the US media? I find it hard to think that a Chinese corporation could sue Apple without the involvement the Party.
What's the payout for them?
Our freedoms
Bad analogy? It was, I admit it. What is happening today is a precursor to the end of the current library model, though. We already see this with the ebook market- publishers need to decide if their works can be lent or not on Barnes & Noble (I own a Nook, so that's what I'm familiar with). Many books cannot be lent.
Other media companies (movies, music, and gaming is starting as well) are doing their best to eliminate the second-hand markets, and to end sharing of the media with others. Academic book publishers do this by making a new edition every year or two, many times with few changes, so that the used textbook's lifespan is short. "Traditional" book publishers are / will be looking for a way to monetize their product's lifespan as well- whether it is a licensing fee libraries pay for each book checked out or higher costs for books that libraries purchase.
My initial post may have been a bad analogy, but only time will tell. The safe bet is the publishers will find a way to remain profitable, and communities like mine will continue to reduce the number of libraries and associated services.
I've heard of these buildings, many even publicly sponsored, where books are shared, and one does not need to pay the publisher for the privilege of reading their work. I propose these houses of corruption be banned, so they stop stealing from the coffers of the rich!
As our device sales will start to drop from this point forward, we have decided that we will follow in the footsteps of SCO.p>
SCO: Sue Companies Onward!
At both health centers where I live, all employees are required to receive the flu vaccine, or they will be shamed into termination. Shame includes wearing a facemask at all times while working, poor performance reviews, and they will not receive any pay increases (yes, this was all spelled out in memos to the staff).
A few decades longer than the New York City PD has been allowed to operate outside of their city limits (and state and national borders as well).
He may have been armed, but one thing that stuck with me was this quote from New Zealand Detective Inspector Grant Wormald (source here):
"Police arrived in two marked Police helicopters ... Despite our staff clearly identifying themselves..."
Reading between the lines, and from observing pictures released to the Press of the raid, the vehicles and officers on the ground were clad in black. For all Kim Dotcom knew, he was under attack by terrorists pretending to be police. He had to look away from the vehicles, people, and guns, just to find one marked vehicle which indicated a Police operation. And that vehicle was high above him.
This is Round 2 of SOPA and PIPA- not-as-high-profile sites (such as Reddit) are going to get "shut down" on the guise of "protecting the children", to reduce public knowledge of censorship in the future. These guys are out to discredit Reddit as a whole, not remove a couple of groups. Makes me wonder about Slashdot's "abuse flag"- did the moderator program suck so much, and who forced that to happen?
The full quote FTFA:
According to Marietje Schaake, a Dutch member of the European Parliament, the problems with the agreement appeared at the start of the process, when too many things were swept under the ACTA umbrella.
“The agreement is seeking to address a number of very different issues of which some are serious problems of public health and public safety, for example trade in fake medicine,” Ms. Schaake said. “But that issue doesn’t compare to the alleged cost to society of online piracy. It seeks to kill 20 birds with one stone. It risks not solving the legitimate concerns but causing incredible collateral damage.”
She is stating that ACTA, while started with "good intentions" (such as to stop counterfeit drug trade), grew in scope beyond what it was meant to be. The MAFFIA jumped on the bandwagon and included their 0.02 cents worth (yes, it is less valuable than my 2 cent's worth). She says that online piracy is nowhere near the problem that requires a solution such as ACTA- and that counterfeit pharmaceuticals are a problem that have serious (and real) consequences.
That happened to me years ago as well. I think the idea there is if the instructor used the same book for a couple years, at least the web content could be made to expire and the publisher could make more money. In the end, I bought the used Biology book and the full-price website subscription.
But dumbing them? how?
Our educational system seems to be making progress in this area. When the success of schools and teachers depends on student test scores, and not what the student achieves later in life, we've already dumbed down the populace. Now, to be "successful" or "smart", you only need to look good on paper. Who cares about real-world knowledge.
The RIAA also warns that the need to hire an attorney to navigate the ITC's arcane legal process
I thought they already owned a bunch of lawyers- why do you need to hire more? So you can open the Second Front at the ITC?
No, I don't think it's a big sham by politicians. For many of them, their campaigns (and wealth) relies on RIAA/MPAA and other SOPA/PIPA/ACTA supporters contributions. If it was a ploy to take Hollywood money, I think Hollywood would have figured it out before now. We're at a tipping point in World / US history- change is coming (and not the false Change of Obama). What we are observing is people, and politicians as the people's proxy, saying enough is enough.
I think a good analogy for DNS is the phone book: suppose your friend is gay or lesbian, and use the Yellow Book to find services that cater to their needs. However, the local churches petition Yellow Book to stop advertising such establishments. Unless your friend knows where to find a different phone book, they won't be able to find said services. However, the services didn't cease to exist or move.
That is what the law's DNS provisions did- they didn't stop anyone who knew of alternate DNS servers to access.
As for the destructiveness of the other parts of the law- point to the cell phone manufacturer sue-party going on right now, the "John Doe" mass suing pursued by the *IAAs, and Righthaven's actions. If your friend still feels that Righthaven was right to take down content used under the "Fair Use" provisions, then they will never learn (until it's too late). When that happens, I'm sure they'll ask you about alternate DNS and Tor.
I wouldn't be surprised if that is how it went (I won't RTFA yet- better to just jump to conclusions)- young rap group makes song, big rap group (signed to Universal) says "Cool, can we use that for a project?", young rap groups says yes because of exposure, and Universal proceeds to claim sole copyright on the song.
I think part of the problem is no one knows that ACTA is, exactly. My understanding when ACTA came to a year ago was that different versions were released so they could track who leaked ACTA.
Why do they need a whole new system just to include social networking sites?
Maybe so people think they don't have that capability?
So I would assume the FBI motivation is more on these lines as the likelihood of social media sites can get legally shutdown.
I recall that as well. Maybe the FBI doesn't want to shut it down, though- by passively monitoring, they can determine where the next gathering point will be. If they were to shut it down, another method of communication (not as readily intercepted) would be used rather quickly. It would probably take protestors time to learn which services (or accounts) were compromised and, by selectively targeting demonstrations, they (the FBI) could further obfuscate the data source.
I think Symantec handled this ok, when Anon stated they had the source code last week Symantec issued a statement about what they had, mainly 2006 code.
Personally, I would feel better if Symantec could come out and say, "You know, Anon does have the source code that was stolen from us in 2006, but we've patched those vulnerabilities over the last 5 years. All of our products, including pcAnywhere, are secure and reliable."
I know that Symantec says the rest of the products are safe- I just wonder why it couldn't be "all" products.
The source was stole in 2006. This means that they corrected the problems in their other products which had stolen source, but not pcAnywhere. For 5-6 years, Symantec has been selling software which was potentially compromised.
The current reported theft happened recently, but that source code came from a theft (unreported by Symantec, but known) back in 2006. That means, since 2006, Symantec has known the pcAnywhere source was stolen, knew of vulnerabilities, and chose not to fix that product. It sounds like they patched the rest of their products, though.
I don't think it makes sense, but they are just saying, hey Amazon, you can't sell a book created with our tool, since you aren't paying for it. If this new iBooks Editor becomes the defacto standard for eBook publishing, then thats worth a lot of money. But they are probably just trying to keep competitors from stealing the look and feel of their products too easily. I think that they will forget about it and let it loose when they realize its not a bad thing to let more people become experts in their software to publish in their channel
Emphasis mine... there is a lot of thinking in there. Are you one of Apple's lawyers? Apple didn't do this to share freely with the world- they see a market opportunity (eBooks on iPads since every school wants to get on the "iPad for every child!" bandwagon), they see a fanbase who unconditionally believes in them ("I think Apple will only do good with this eBook format!"), and they've identified a gap in the current tools (eBook publishing isn't as easy for Grandma yet).
Apple doesn't write EULAs for fun or as "busy work" for legal interns. There is intent behind those words.
I was surprised i got an actual email back from my senator saying he had taken his name off the bill and promising to vote against it so he must have got enough nasty hate mail to get spooked as you usually just get a standard "Please vote for me!" bullshit chain letter begging for more cash.
I heard back from my House Representative first, with a form letter reply that didn't address my specific concerns with SOPA. My reaction was to reply to the email, and the message has not been able to clear my outbox. I'm pissed at him, and am seriously considering running against him.
I heard back from one Senator, with another form letter. He also failed to address my specific concerns, but it took him 3 days to respond and he didn't support PIPA in then end (for now). For him... I'll just vote for someone else. He's lost my vote.