It doesn't solve a problem that XO has. Linux fits very well.
Windows on ARM doesn't solve any problem XO has either, and potentially causes some, like licensing and lock-in. between you and me, if we're gonna start kids off with computers in the Third World, Linux makes WAY more sense than Windows. Even more than Android. Crome is not ready, and the cloud may not be Third-World-Friendly for a long time. try not to rely on resources that are either not available, cost more than food, or can be taken away by other nations, or even their own.
If ever there was a project that leverages the maximum potential for freedom via the Internet, this is it. Really, give the kids someething they can work with and watch out. Somethings wonderful will happen.
First, there are plenty of non-states that would like to, and indeed are this moment planning to, cause harm to the United States, its people, and other nations that are generally considered our allies. Even some that are not. This motivation has, in the past, been expressed by actions that are not those of a conventional military, nor of even fairly unconventional war. Trying to dismiss 'cyberwar' as something that is not likely because it would not be termed 'war' misses the point and wastes my time.
War by technical manipulation of the Internet, etc., would be damaging, and it is not inconceivable that it could cost lives directly and indirectly. This meets any definition of war that I'm interested in working with. Parsing the words will not change the outcomes, so let's stop that, ok?
And it should be obvious that adversaries that are not 'states' will certainly not be less motivated to do us harm by 'cyberwar' means just because such means don't involve massive visible, physical damage and attendant casualties. Indeed, many will see this as a method that can yield them substantial gains for what is limited exposure to retaliation.
I'm left thinking that not only do many Slashdotters buy into this 'no cyberwar threat' campaign, but that our leaders may. Discounting a new weapon is not a good military strategy. Perhaps we won't be using guns and bullets to fight this fight, but actually a well-placed explosive could isolate any number of cyberwar forces if they are limiting themselves to their home states. Needless to say, these combatants will be dispersing themselves to avoid being cut off, literally, from their battlefield. Finding them will be the challenge. Deflecting and mitigating the attacks will be needed, but finding the actual perpetrators will be a challenge. The question will be if this is necessary.
And there's no real threat of me being blown by an airplane terrorist."
Same for me, but that's because I rarely fly nowadays.
"But that's completely irrelevant for government leaders desiring to control everything within their sight."
Their reactions would be the same if they were instead desiring to not to be in office when an attack was successful. Bonus points for thwarting attacks in a way that can be disclosed. More points if any of various terrorist groups claim to be planning attacks and nothing happens...
"So enjoy your slef-portrait porn, scanner-induced skin cancer, your breast/penis fondling by the SA, and the eventual limitations placed upon the internet/free speech. It's inevitable."
Yes, indeed. Many excuses available for the powers to do these things. We must be vigilant.
Woops, much further up the chain. In limited context:
"Making examples of people just because they have upset a celebrity figure is barbarian and i'm glad i'm not an American if this sort of thing is acceptable there. Where i come from everyone is equal, a crime against a politician holds the same weight as a crime against your average citizen."
"And it abundantly illustrates why they shouldn’t be doing it in the first place. After all, if you have nothing to hide. .."
In what way might you be implying that Mr. Kernell accessed Sara Palin's email account to look for potential evidence of any behavior at all? My impression is that he did it just because he COULD.
As if the motive justifies the act. Wrong. Alerting the authorities, that tney could undertake an investigation, would make sense. But remember, Mr. Kernell is the son of a Democratic state legislator. He should not be presumed to be naive about the political issues involved. The legal issues, we know he wasn't unaware of.
You would feel better about it if I recommended 'never accused'?
Truth is, the original statement: "someone who never broke any laws before" is less accurate than "someone who was never caught breaking any laws before".
But I see that the latter statement offends you. You have a right to be offended by the facts.
Prove he was never caught? Gee, by all accounts he did not have a record. That was partly my point. Are you expecting me to prove he WAS caught?
Focus. It's pretty common to claim that perpetrators of certain crimes are inevitably guilty of previous offenses, but not others. No proof was implied by me, just noting that the assumption of no previous acts was probably as unwarranted as your claim that we should not assume he WAS guilty of any previous acts.
Obviously you didn't click through any of the links I offered.
This issue of accessing peoples' email accounts is a significant issue in civil cases, and is rarely but regularly prosecuted in relation to divorces, identity theft, and other fairly low-profile cases.
Just because it's not widely reported doesn't mean it's not happening.
He is convicted and sentenced. The law doesn't really care about any potential and undetected criminal behavior, and the judge seems to have sentenced him to the minimum necessary to ensure a felony, but no more.
We, however, are unfettered by such limitations, and can speculate on his past acts and potential future acts.
Changing the combo isn't rocket science. Guessing a 5-digit sequence using only 4 unique digits is nontrivial, but doable. Changing your combo after the keys are worn will complicate the 'clever' thief's work by misleading them.
Of course, my Explorer has a PATS key, so getting into the car solves the easy problem. Just as easy to crawl under and snip the battery, then jimmy the door and slipt it into neutral - tow it away to do your work in relative security. Breaking the window is at least as obvious as crawling under the front.
"Sure, habitual offenders might need something a little more tough but in this case we're talking about someone who never broke any laws before."
Um, fix this:
"Sure, habitual offenders might need something a little more tough but in this case we're talking about someone who was never caught breaking any laws before."
" Guessing someones password to yahoo mail, does not seem like a severe crime to me"
Actually that might not be a crime. But actually *using* it is a crime. So confirming that you guessed their password is the first crime.
In the ancient days of amateur radio, it was law that while you could listen to other peoples' transmissions, you could not divulge the contents to others, nor take actions based on such eavesdropping. It's pretty easy to listen in to otehr peoples' conversations, and you might do so to tune your rig, test equipment, verify propogation, so outlawing that was pointless. But it was (and is) properly wrong to take advantage of the contents. This should be obvious. Same thing with guessing passwords and accessing email. Oh, and Mr. Kenell didn't guess the password, he guessed the security questions and changed the password. Overt and intentional.
"if anything Sarah Palin should be schooled on password security and disciplined for sharing sensitive information over yahoo of all things"
Fine. You're assuming, I think, that Yahoo Mail should be considered insecure. I work for a financial institution also, and I don't use external emails for business not because they are insecure, but because my employer wants me to use their system which they have control of and can take responsibility for. that's important - they don't declare other systems insecure, they just recognize they have no control over other systems, and so require empliyees to use systems they DO have control of. You're deciding that the Palins should be using a different system? Care to recommend one?
"Making examples of people just because they have upset a celebrity figure is barbarian and i'm glad i'm not an American if this sort of thing is acceptable there. Where i come from everyone is equal, a crime against a politician holds the same weight as a crime against your average citizen."
"no one was physically harmed or deprived of property, and he is no danger to society."
Ok, so what in fact DID he do?
- Violated someone's privacy. This is a harm, and if you think emotional harm is not as intense as physical harm, I encourage you to say that out loud. You are wrong on that count.
- Oh, and this required the McCain/Aplin campaign to suspend use of email for a short period to reestablish security. How short a time? At the moment, even an hour could have had consequences. How about you giving up your email address and having all of your contacts notified of your new address. Much trouble for you?
- HIPAA violations carry penalties also. Do we want to start qualifying the nature of the privacy violation? No, you don't want to do that.
- Remember, his father was active in Democratic Party politics, he disclosed a fair amount of private information, and this was done at the 'height of the 2008 Presidential campaign'. This was not a random act of identity theft. Oh, and he did send stuff to Wikileaks. I'm not blaming Julian for publishing that, that's a separate issue, but Mr. Kennell knew what he waa doing, and it had an impact.
Oh, and to add to my concern that we are not properly understanding the FBOP decision, the judge recommended that this young man spend his time in a 'halfway house'. Besides the reality that he would have been in a 'halfway house' with 'more dangerous individuals' (a qualitative assessment I'm not qualified to make), that is not the result required by Federal law. The law specifices incarceration, and perhaps FBOP decided that this convict should first serve time in an actual facility, and then qualify for the relaxed status, as other convict have to. Or more succinctly, like any other convict, he does time like they do, special treatment is unwarranted.
Perhaps the judge should have sentenced him to probation? But that would open the judge to criticism of being improperly lenient, which is he is now getting a full dose of.
A lot of the responses questioning the DBOP decision seem to be focused on minimizing this young man's crime based on his age, naivete, and *apparent* lack of harm caused. For those of you who forgot, some of the impacts of his actions:
- 'Abusive' phone calls to most of the Palin family. - Disclosure of other email addresses against the wishes of those owners. - Disruption of communications with family, friends, co-workers, campaign staff.
This whining is another case of minimizing a 'soft' crime. Not much different from trying to excuse any number of crimes committed by young individuals, primarily based on their age. Be careful. The next victim could be you. Will you be forgiving based soley on their age?
My G1 runs Froyo, gets HSPA (I'm bending the needle at 3MB down/776K up now, sometimes getting 5.5MB down), has the 2708 hack for another 10MB RAM, and is much more useful than when it was released.
Now, for other devices, the ability to root it and run your own ROM is not guaranteed, but if its there, you are no longer tied to the carrier for updates.
The Vibrant has been rooted, but the GPS and camera are giving the developers a lot of trouble, and I'm thinking it will not get a useful Froyo ROM before the 4G rev comes out.
This alone means I will probably not buy a Galaxy- based phone. More likely one of the Nexus variants.
You are not intereacting with the sort of Tea Party members I have. In fact, my expeience is the opposite of yours - the Tea Party members I've intreacted with are entirely focused on issues of taxation, immigration, healthcare financing, and states' rights. And they are a healthy mix of various races, admittedly almost all openly heterosexual, both married and unmarried, and also overhelmingly spiritual, mostly Christian.
If they hated "everyone who isn't a rich white protestant heterosexual in a traditional family role.", about one half would hate the other half. And the other half would hate themselves. That's not entirely implausible, but usually the self-loathers don't bother to go so far out of their way to do so. They have ample opportunity to hate themselves before they get their teeth brushed in the morning, no need to form a political movement to do so publicly.
More precisely, you're full of it. Enjoy. Sad life.
Um, if its locked, it's closed. Knowing how things work just a little, unlocking the radio core is not a good idea, even if it seems unused. Incoming calls do not respect threading.
You forget all the 'Winblows' comments from the Slackware lusers, the 1337 kiddies braggin on how they can script faster and better than you, laments over Usenet, and of course the deluge when AOL burst at the seams and started bleeding users into the 'real Internet'.
Oh, and all us h@xors proud of changing our Winblows desktops to look like KDE 3 revs ago.
No shortage of snark. At least Shashdot hasn't gone dark yet.
Re:You realize Schmidt's wife's boats are sailboat
on
In the Google Navy
·
· Score: 1
Not to mention the noxious chemicals in the epoxies, manufacturing the carbon-fiber to start with, etc.
And the manure from horse racing has its usefulness. More than the discarded carbon-fiber components from the sailboat, which at best lay inert in a landfill, and at worst leach interesting stuff into the aquifers below when the landfill inevitably fails.
Re:You realize Schmidt's wife's boats are sailboat
on
In the Google Navy
·
· Score: 2
Generally speaking, the only kinds of racing that have anything approaching a 'green' fotprint are the kinds of racing that leave footprints.
Auto racing can't claim a green footprint. Even solar racing has a manufacturing footprint that is noticeable.
Boats? Powerboats of course just crave fuels. Sail? Except perhaps for some small classes, they rely on exotic materials. Smaller classes are starting to give in to this a little bit.
Planes? hehe... Gliders? Carbon-fiber.
Even bicycles use such exotics that their footprint is scary, perhaps the worst emissions/lb. of anything.
Slashdot Mirror
Many here try to minimize the threat. I understand, but of course, there's the delusion thing...
It doesn't solve a problem that XO has. Linux fits very well.
Windows on ARM doesn't solve any problem XO has either, and potentially causes some, like licensing and lock-in. between you and me, if we're gonna start kids off with computers in the Third World, Linux makes WAY more sense than Windows. Even more than Android. Crome is not ready, and the cloud may not be Third-World-Friendly for a long time. try not to rely on resources that are either not available, cost more than food, or can be taken away by other nations, or even their own.
If ever there was a project that leverages the maximum potential for freedom via the Internet, this is it. Really, give the kids someething they can work with and watch out. Somethings wonderful will happen.
First, there are plenty of non-states that would like to, and indeed are this moment planning to, cause harm to the United States, its people, and other nations that are generally considered our allies. Even some that are not. This motivation has, in the past, been expressed by actions that are not those of a conventional military, nor of even fairly unconventional war. Trying to dismiss 'cyberwar' as something that is not likely because it would not be termed 'war' misses the point and wastes my time.
War by technical manipulation of the Internet, etc., would be damaging, and it is not inconceivable that it could cost lives directly and indirectly. This meets any definition of war that I'm interested in working with. Parsing the words will not change the outcomes, so let's stop that, ok?
And it should be obvious that adversaries that are not 'states' will certainly not be less motivated to do us harm by 'cyberwar' means just because such means don't involve massive visible, physical damage and attendant casualties. Indeed, many will see this as a method that can yield them substantial gains for what is limited exposure to retaliation.
I'm left thinking that not only do many Slashdotters buy into this 'no cyberwar threat' campaign, but that our leaders may. Discounting a new weapon is not a good military strategy. Perhaps we won't be using guns and bullets to fight this fight, but actually a well-placed explosive could isolate any number of cyberwar forces if they are limiting themselves to their home states. Needless to say, these combatants will be dispersing themselves to avoid being cut off, literally, from their battlefield. Finding them will be the challenge. Deflecting and mitigating the attacks will be needed, but finding the actual perpetrators will be a challenge. The question will be if this is necessary.
"There's no real threat of cyberwar."
Um, citations, please.
And there's no real threat of me being blown by an airplane terrorist."
Same for me, but that's because I rarely fly nowadays.
"But that's completely irrelevant for government leaders desiring to control everything within their sight."
Their reactions would be the same if they were instead desiring to not to be in office when an attack was successful. Bonus points for thwarting attacks in a way that can be disclosed. More points if any of various terrorist groups claim to be planning attacks and nothing happens...
"So enjoy your slef-portrait porn, scanner-induced skin cancer, your breast/penis fondling by the SA, and the eventual limitations placed upon the internet/free speech. It's inevitable."
Yes, indeed. Many excuses available for the powers to do these things. We must be vigilant.
Woops, much further up the chain. In limited context:
"Making examples of people just because they have upset a celebrity figure is barbarian and i'm glad i'm not an American if this sort of thing is acceptable there. Where i come from everyone is equal, a crime against a politician holds the same weight as a crime against your average citizen."
Well, I think average citizens are charged with that crime,and some have faced civil actions.
Sorry for the mixup.
"And it abundantly illustrates why they shouldn’t be doing it in the first place. After all, if you have nothing to hide. . ."
In what way might you be implying that Mr. Kernell accessed Sara Palin's email account to look for potential evidence of any behavior at all? My impression is that he did it just because he COULD.
As if the motive justifies the act. Wrong. Alerting the authorities, that tney could undertake an investigation, would make sense. But remember, Mr. Kernell is the son of a Democratic state legislator. He should not be presumed to be naive about the political issues involved. The legal issues, we know he wasn't unaware of.
You would feel better about it if I recommended 'never accused'?
Truth is, the original statement: "someone who never broke any laws before" is less accurate than "someone who was never caught breaking any laws before".
But I see that the latter statement offends you. You have a right to be offended by the facts.
Prove he was never caught? Gee, by all accounts he did not have a record. That was partly my point. Are you expecting me to prove he WAS caught?
Focus. It's pretty common to claim that perpetrators of certain crimes are inevitably guilty of previous offenses, but not others. No proof was implied by me, just noting that the assumption of no previous acts was probably as unwarranted as your claim that we should not assume he WAS guilty of any previous acts.
I sure have, and paid the fines.
I just haven't committed any felonies that I know of.
Obviously you didn't click through any of the links I offered.
This issue of accessing peoples' email accounts is a significant issue in civil cases, and is rarely but regularly prosecuted in relation to divorces, identity theft, and other fairly low-profile cases.
Just because it's not widely reported doesn't mean it's not happening.
He is convicted and sentenced. The law doesn't really care about any potential and undetected criminal behavior, and the judge seems to have sentenced him to the minimum necessary to ensure a felony, but no more.
We, however, are unfettered by such limitations, and can speculate on his past acts and potential future acts.
Changing the combo isn't rocket science. Guessing a 5-digit sequence using only 4 unique digits is nontrivial, but doable. Changing your combo after the keys are worn will complicate the 'clever' thief's work by misleading them.
Of course, my Explorer has a PATS key, so getting into the car solves the easy problem. Just as easy to crawl under and snip the battery, then jimmy the door and slipt it into neutral - tow it away to do your work in relative security. Breaking the window is at least as obvious as crawling under the front.
And look for the Lojack box. Gotta get that too.
"Sure, habitual offenders might need something a little more tough but in this case we're talking about someone who never broke any laws before."
Um, fix this:
"Sure, habitual offenders might need something a little more tough but in this case we're talking about someone who was never caught breaking any laws before."
There. More accurate.
" Guessing someones password to yahoo mail, does not seem like a severe crime to me"
Actually that might not be a crime. But actually *using* it is a crime. So confirming that you guessed their password is the first crime.
In the ancient days of amateur radio, it was law that while you could listen to other peoples' transmissions, you could not divulge the contents to others, nor take actions based on such eavesdropping. It's pretty easy to listen in to otehr peoples' conversations, and you might do so to tune your rig, test equipment, verify propogation, so outlawing that was pointless. But it was (and is) properly wrong to take advantage of the contents. This should be obvious. Same thing with guessing passwords and accessing email. Oh, and Mr. Kenell didn't guess the password, he guessed the security questions and changed the password. Overt and intentional.
"if anything Sarah Palin should be schooled on password security and disciplined for sharing sensitive information over yahoo of all things"
Fine. You're assuming, I think, that Yahoo Mail should be considered insecure. I work for a financial institution also, and I don't use external emails for business not because they are insecure, but because my employer wants me to use their system which they have control of and can take responsibility for. that's important - they don't declare other systems insecure, they just recognize they have no control over other systems, and so require empliyees to use systems they DO have control of. You're deciding that the Palins should be using a different system? Care to recommend one?
"Making examples of people just because they have upset a celebrity figure is barbarian and i'm glad i'm not an American if this sort of thing is acceptable there. Where i come from everyone is equal, a crime against a politician holds the same weight as a crime against your average citizen."
Well, I think average citizens are charged with that crime,and some have faced civil actions.
"no one was physically harmed or deprived of property, and he is no danger to society."
Ok, so what in fact DID he do?
- Violated someone's privacy. This is a harm, and if you think emotional harm is not as intense as physical harm, I encourage you to say that out loud. You are wrong on that count.
- Oh, and this required the McCain/Aplin campaign to suspend use of email for a short period to reestablish security. How short a time? At the moment, even an hour could have had consequences. How about you giving up your email address and having all of your contacts notified of your new address. Much trouble for you?
- HIPAA violations carry penalties also. Do we want to start qualifying the nature of the privacy violation? No, you don't want to do that.
- Remember, his father was active in Democratic Party politics, he disclosed a fair amount of private information, and this was done at the 'height of the 2008 Presidential campaign'. This was not a random act of identity theft. Oh, and he did send stuff to Wikileaks. I'm not blaming Julian for publishing that, that's a separate issue, but Mr. Kennell knew what he waa doing, and it had an impact.
Oh, and to add to my concern that we are not properly understanding the FBOP decision, the judge recommended that this young man spend his time in a 'halfway house'. Besides the reality that he would have been in a 'halfway house' with 'more dangerous individuals' (a qualitative assessment I'm not qualified to make), that is not the result required by Federal law. The law specifices incarceration, and perhaps FBOP decided that this convict should first serve time in an actual facility, and then qualify for the relaxed status, as other convict have to. Or more succinctly, like any other convict, he does time like they do, special treatment is unwarranted.
Perhaps the judge should have sentenced him to probation? But that would open the judge to criticism of being improperly lenient, which is he is now getting a full dose of.
A lot of the responses questioning the DBOP decision seem to be focused on minimizing this young man's crime based on his age, naivete, and *apparent* lack of harm caused. For those of you who forgot, some of the impacts of his actions:
- 'Abusive' phone calls to most of the Palin family.
- Disclosure of other email addresses against the wishes of those owners.
- Disruption of communications with family, friends, co-workers, campaign staff.
This whining is another case of minimizing a 'soft' crime. Not much different from trying to excuse any number of crimes committed by young individuals, primarily based on their age. Be careful. The next victim could be you. Will you be forgiving based soley on their age?
My G1 runs Froyo, gets HSPA (I'm bending the needle at 3MB down/776K up now, sometimes getting 5.5MB down), has the 2708 hack for another 10MB RAM, and is much more useful than when it was released.
Now, for other devices, the ability to root it and run your own ROM is not guaranteed, but if its there, you are no longer tied to the carrier for updates.
The Vibrant has been rooted, but the GPS and camera are giving the developers a lot of trouble, and I'm thinking it will not get a useful Froyo ROM before the 4G rev comes out.
This alone means I will probably not buy a Galaxy- based phone. More likely one of the Nexus variants.
"They have succeeded in setting off the crazies again and again in the last few years"
I haven't been keeping score. Who were the crazies, and what did they do, in the last few years. Feel free to go back to 2001. Is it a long list?
You are not intereacting with the sort of Tea Party members I have. In fact, my expeience is the opposite of yours - the Tea Party members I've intreacted with are entirely focused on issues of taxation, immigration, healthcare financing, and states' rights. And they are a healthy mix of various races, admittedly almost all openly heterosexual, both married and unmarried, and also overhelmingly spiritual, mostly Christian.
If they hated "everyone who isn't a rich white protestant heterosexual in a traditional family role.", about one half would hate the other half. And the other half would hate themselves. That's not entirely implausible, but usually the self-loathers don't bother to go so far out of their way to do so. They have ample opportunity to hate themselves before they get their teeth brushed in the morning, no need to form a political movement to do so publicly.
More precisely, you're full of it. Enjoy. Sad life.
Um, if its locked, it's closed. Knowing how things work just a little, unlocking the radio core is not a good idea, even if it seems unused. Incoming calls do not respect threading.
So you're telling me my 486DX-2/66 was dual-core because it had a graphics processor on the board?
Not so much.
And the G1 is underclocked to 328 or something in stock ROMs. Mine runs at 576 now. Root is cool.
You forget all the 'Winblows' comments from the Slackware lusers, the 1337 kiddies braggin on how they can script faster and better than you, laments over Usenet, and of course the deluge when AOL burst at the seams and started bleeding users into the 'real Internet'.
Oh, and all us h@xors proud of changing our Winblows desktops to look like KDE 3 revs ago.
No shortage of snark. At least Shashdot hasn't gone dark yet.
Not to mention the noxious chemicals in the epoxies, manufacturing the carbon-fiber to start with, etc.
And the manure from horse racing has its usefulness. More than the discarded carbon-fiber components from the sailboat, which at best lay inert in a landfill, and at worst leach interesting stuff into the aquifers below when the landfill inevitably fails.
Generally speaking, the only kinds of racing that have anything approaching a 'green' fotprint are the kinds of racing that leave footprints.
Auto racing can't claim a green footprint. Even solar racing has a manufacturing footprint that is noticeable.
Boats? Powerboats of course just crave fuels. Sail? Except perhaps for some small classes, they rely on exotic materials. Smaller classes are starting to give in to this a little bit.
Planes? hehe... Gliders? Carbon-fiber.
Even bicycles use such exotics that their footprint is scary, perhaps the worst emissions/lb. of anything.
But footracing, horse racing, maybe.
Getting modded at least once 'Insightful' would argue that my interpretation was shared by at least one other.
I'm comfortable with my assessment and response. You might want to check your filters.