The Aussies are going to have a hell of a time enforcing these rules. It is too easy to remote admin a server used for web publising. One can own several servers across the globe, employ colocation, etc. The only laws governing the internet that will ever really have "bite" are treaties. The internet is a global phenomenon and can only be governed globally, much like the open seas are now governed by international treaties.
The internet should be officially declared international space. Then we will get some sensible resolutions to the conflicting values inherent in international intercourse. Until that happens, we can safely evaluate all domestic attempts to govern the internet as ineffective. There is no international enforcement mechanism (nor should there be, arguably); but until there is one, moving from violative status to non-violative is a simple matter of pointing the DNS entries to different IPs (in a foreign jurisdiction where the regulations do not apply). This will remain the case for the foreseeable future.
Here is a good story about the nature of the remand. It basically says that the Appeal court agreed to an En Banc hearing to evaluate the merits of Bernstein in light of the new BXA regulations on crypto. However, since this case was about speach, my prediction is that 9th Circuit will uphold the panel's decision. Requiring a 'license' to speak is hardly different under 1st Amend jurisprudence than disallowing it. I expect the BXA to be embarrassed again.
As I have predicted the government will continue to act more and more like a private corporation. It really has no other choice. Privatization is a means of survival in our new world of extremely rapid change. The public too must privatize. There should be family corporations that exist to nurture the family's investments. The corporate form will continue to proliferate at a fast pace. Those who do not take advantage of the benefits of the corporate form will endure increasing liabilities, i.e., privacy intrusions.
Ok so they have something in common with the rest of us.
Here's something they don't have in common with the rest of us.
When the Congress subpoenas information from you company usually a letter from lawyers that says 'sorry, atty client privilege' is not sufficient to end the inquiry.
Ok so they have something in common with the rest of us.
Here's something they don't have in common with the rest of us.
When the Congress subpoenas information from your company usually a letter from lawyers that says 'sorry, atty client privilege' is not sufficient to end the inquiry.
IIRC when networksolutions.com was rs.internic.net didn't *.org sites mean the site was a non-profit enterprise?
With Andover.net's IPO should slashdot.org become slashdot.com? Not to reign in on Taco's parade, but he sells stuff on this site (i.e., slow banner ads). There's nothing *.org about this site anymore.
Just an observation.
Re:URL for information on IPv6
on
CNN On IPv6
·
· Score: 1
What if we could build a public network built on IPv6? Would it be useful? The benefit to society would be increased privacy the cost would be the need for people to eschew complacency.
Solution: infringe on everyone's patents and copyright *but* earn no profit from it. One will thus be rendered judgment proof.
Oya, the person who submitted this article seems to imply copyrights are somehow more palatable than patents. I can't think of a reason why since copyright monopolies last for the life of the author plus 70 years versus the 20 for a patent. Also, it is harder to obtain a patent. Perhaps he is just referring to the lunacy of the current patent administrators in their patenting of obvious ideas with much prior art. This is different than saying patents are more invidious than copyrights. In the sofware arena, the distinction between copyrights and patents nearly disappears. Where copyrights apply to specific works of authorship and patents apply to ideas registered with the USPTO in the specified manner, in software both works of authorship and the ideas are so easy to duplicate and proliferate that enforcing monopolies of the fruits of intellect becomes impracticable.
Prediction: the only workable way to regulate the internet will be to treat it as a separate legal jurisdiction, much like we do with international waters. It will be governed by treaties rather than domestic regulations. In this context an international standards body will determine patentablity and copyrightablity. This will lead to more equitable rules on the subject. Because the need for this method of regulation will emerge from a perceived impracticability in regulating the thing we will see a minimalist approach to regulation (i.e., similar to Hong Kong's laissez faire policies).
With the recent news I can image a scary but realistic sci-reality.
People who except the mark will receive, not only food and shelter (as approved members of the New Society), but rejuventated neurons and benign nano-viruses that will search for errors in their genetic code and fix them all. Others will modify the person's genes to give them precedented health strength and intelligence. Finally, these people will receive fetal stem-cell treatment over the course of their lives to replace parishable cells with immortal ones. As an added bonus these people will be awarded genetically engineered and cloned automaton slaves to service needs of sex, labor, and comfort.
Meanwhile, the rest of the population (like all people who do not excepte the tatoo) will be allowed to starve and die from nanomachines and nano-viruses designed to kill them and decompose their bodies into basic non-polluting carbons and nitrogens that will be used to fertilize the global re-greenification project.
Sound impossible? You don't read/. enough if you think so.
Here's what I will do: Run for the hills; try to disappear; shoot first ask questions later. Oh shit! I hope nothing even close to this ever happens.
The way to bypass the need for a 'product' i.e., a software package that encrypts files; is for trusted users of a network to participate in VPN with IPSec and SSH. These keys change on a daily basis.
Then the members of the VPN would utilize a distributed.net that works in the inverse; i.e., it cranks out huge keys on the fly using the power of all the processors on the network.
The internet is a public place. We need to build up the private areas and make them fortified and barracaded.
In addition, these trusted servers (that would ulimately reside at various points on the globe would have colocation for one another's encrypted data. That way data could be transferred instantly around the globe upon the trigger of some event (i.e., 5 incorrect passwd entries) or some command (i.e., paging the server with a certain numerical code). Then the data on the investigated computer would be transferred to a safe location and the investigated box would be wiped.
Finally, we can take advantage of the 'bankers' exception to this bill by keeping banking and financial information on the home server. That is all credit card transactions would be routed through the home server to the participating banking institution; thus, making the home server function as an extension of the banking institution's computer network. Alternatively, we should found an online credit-union and make all our home servers part of that enterprise.
Many people have strong opinions about this. But this is exactly the kind of event that we as a community should have an open patent and trademark portfolio. Linus should have something to say about this trademark claim though.
Bumping heads with people like this is inevitable. He just have to be lions and be brave and fight the good fight. There is no way around it.
See, what we are trying to do at ompages.com is to adjust networking services to according to the legal setting. The adjustment requires a cultural change. We really must take control over our networking services. There should be one networked server per household. Every business and banking transaction should be controlled by the individual's server (which is in his/her physical possession). Here, 'control' means physical control. How does this pertain to patents?
In the Open Source licensing arena, taking control over one's networking services is also taking control of the source code. Here 'control' means 'ownership.' Our theory is that it is not enough for the source code that runs the network to be open. The network links themselves should be as open as possible, and every part of putting a server on the internet should be open. It should not be costly or technically difficult to put a home server on the internet. From email servers to DNS to web servers, all these should facilitate the individuals presence on the internet. The presence should, in turn, represent ownership and control over one's communicated information. The model we live by now entrusts our communicated information to corporate entities that have interests adverse to our own. Namely, we as individuals have an interest in ownership and control over our communicated information and so do the corporations. Just like it is not possible for two people to have an identical ownership interest in a plot of land, it is not possible for two legal persons to have an identical interest in communicated information (unless there is some kind of agreement between the parties). Now, the agreements exist, but the alternative not to agree prevents one from using internet services.
The patent issue is part and parcel of this arrangement. The industry trend is for corporations to have greater and greater control over all aspects of communicated information (i.e., from the idea to the source code to the network services). The Open Source, FSF, etc. movement is helping take back the source code. But this is not enough to achieve freedom on the internet.
What patents do is they allow a legal person (corporations included) to own a monopoly over an idea or a process. The internet is one big mix of processes! Any one of these processes could potentially be patented! There are three ways to curtail the patent intrusions. 1) Abolish patents (completely and utterly unfeasible); 2) Adjust the statutes/case law to exclude software patents from the patentability of 'processes' (feasible but will take a long, long... time); 3) Hackers (and hacker organizations) should rush to the patent office and self-patent everything they do and release the patent under a DFSG-free license (this is the best solution because it keeps the process in the public domain without the risk of corporate opportunism, but it entails organization of efforts to fund the filing fees. Since filing fees are very high by most standards, the organization that facilitates the filings should combine process patents to include as many processes as possible in a single filing).
What licenses like the GPL do is they take legal monopolies (i.e., copyright, patent and trademark) and turn them on their heads. In effect, they say "I own a monopoly on this thing. Because I own this monopoly, I can do anything I choose with it. I choose to let anyone use thing in anyway they want as long as they show everybody." So far, this licensing scheme has only had effect on copyrights. Copyrights are different from patents because the come into existence the moment the author writes down the content (fixes it in a tangible medium of expression), and filing with the Copyright Office is optional. On the other hand, patents only come into existence when a 'claim' is filed, reviewed, and a patent is issued. Trademarks come into existence in sort of a hybrid of the ways patents and copyrights do. The point is that licenses of patented software processes *could* operate just like they do with copyrights on source code, but there are added legal and monetary hurdles to overcome (i.e., filings, and paying fees). Through organization, these hurdles can be assailed.
I some others work daily on ompages.com to achieve the lofty and difficult goals of obtaining and maintaining individual freedoms on the internet. We are not a public interest group. We are working on software and network infrastructure. Anyone can participate. We are not a commercial group. We seek to allow individuals greater control over *all* communications, including commercial communications. I think it's time for us to work on organizing ourselves to take control of patentable processes. I will post a proposal to be announced.
Pardon me if you feel this is an inappropriate forum to advertise a website. I don't see it that way. No, not at all. The way I see it (and many others as well) is that ompages.com is simply a model. We are modeling how a secure, freedom enhancing network should work. Freedom necessarily involves legal BS which is why a professional legal BS'er (in training) has been contributing to this website. We need hackers, web and graphic designers, network administrators, and even barbers, truckers and gardeners to get involved and stay involved. What's exciting about this project is that it is realistic and feasible. Sign up on mailing lists at and participate and you will learn about software packages that will allow you to put your server on the internet (like dhis.org), but with added legal protections coming soon. Basically we have been about a publically accessible secure wide area network (or VPN). Now I think we will also be about patenting every possible networkable process and freeing up the patent with a DFSG/free license. We are looking at the big picture here, and patents are part of it. Once you all apprehend and contemplate what we are trying to do here you will see that it is an extension of the Free Software/Open Source movement. The underlying issue that binds us is freedom. In our project, we are merely trying to adjust the movement to include networking services in an international legal setting. It is no easy task, but neither was the Linux kernel. I truly believe that if the efforts of ompages.com (or similar projects) do not receive widespread development we will have all this nice, freely available software but nothing legal to do with it, except sign an agreement with Corporation X for it to control our lives for a fee (oversimplification intended). I can't predict the future, but I can see a problematic trend. So, there really is no drawback to these efforts.
A vigilant defendant will be wary of the "ferreting effect." It's arbitary enforcement with punitive standards. It builds a fear of the enforcer because all the lawful law breakers are made examples.
The American just system is written to be accusatorial. This is where the government can only allege and accuse. The standard of proof for physical and testimonial evidence in criminal cases is 'guild beyond a reasonable doubt.'
The European system of justice is inquisitorial in nature. In the inquisitorial system one is guilty before proven innocent.
"The inquisitorial system rests on values of efficiency and accuracy, and it is based on trust of authority."
"The accusatorial system rests on a distrust of government and trust of the common man to make fact finding decisions. It is also based on checks and balances. It exhalts the rights of the individual instead of the rights of the government." (Judge Tochterman, McGeorge School of Law, Aug. 1999).
Which system do you prefer? If you prefer the inquisitorial system, which is efficient and accurate, but rests on trust of authority, perhaps you would favor a complete re-vamping of the Constitution?
You have absolutely the right attitude. This is a power for the people by the people only if the people hold on to it tightly, and strike down anyone who would take that power away.
We must engage in character assassination of all government employees who engage in illegal behavior. They must be discredited.
I hope all the privacy sue groups sue like mad if this ever gets off the desk. If this is not the limit to which the 4th Amendment can be eroded, I don't know what is. I might as well go live in an anarchistic unruly 3rd World country rather than live in this Police State.
I really hope everyone starts hitting ompages.com and people, programmers, sys-admins, and web developers start volunteering and taking leadership roles in that public privacy networking project. If any court allow breaking and entering by government officials into my home, I will move out of the US the first opportunity I get.
Searches of homes without Probable Cause is outrageous. A warrant is still required. These officers are trying to search a person's home in search of probable cause. This is utterly unacceptable. Anyone who believes that is a justifiable practice on the part of law enforcement should really think long and hard about the kind of country they want to live in. These practices were just fine in Soviet Russia or in present day China. Did we really win the Cold War so that our law enforcement would be the only ones with all the power? Was the Cold War really a fight for world dominance between the KGB and CIA/FBI/DOJ? I'm starting to think it was.
The only outcome that this kind of activity would create is many many more shootouts with private citizens. The fact that the Gov would even ask for such power makes this a sad, sad, sad day to be an American.
If this type of governmental activity begins no American will have the right to call him or herself a free person. No one will have the right to name America a Democracy, or free. The rights of the individual will finally have been replaced by the government's wanton pursuit of power.
The effort to make the internet as secure as possible for everyone's freedom's sake should dwarf the effort the make linux as easy to use as Windows.
I don't give a DAMN about Windows. I want a secure network dammit! If we don't unite efforts to combat the government by making encryption of everything on the network pervasive, then we will have cheated ourselves out of our freedoms, identities, self-respect. Let the corporations hack linux; its there now. Newsflash!: The revolution is here, and it will not be televised. It's on the network. Drop all coding efforts for all those packages. Put them on hold. All community effort must be geared to counteract these underhanded government activities. If you fail to act now; you are a sheep and you will be sheered and slaughtered.
It's fine to work on fun 3Dfx, and other cool technology. But we must get our priorities straight now or forever lose our freedom. Imagine how powerful the Linux movement would become if the people who have been hacking kernels and GPL apps outsources the work to the corporations working to make Linux more corp friendly and begin making Linux a powerful public tool to secure privacy, speech, and privilege. Focusing on corporate acceptance of Linux is a job for corporations like Red Hat. They seek to profit from Linux. I seek to make Linux the primary tool by which I gain control over my speech. Isn't that what this is all about? If you all want 'geek' and 'nerd' to ever achieve positive connotations you all must accept your duty to be warriors for the people. You are warriors. You have that power. Be heroes and heroines. Don't be sheep.
Today my keyboard stopped working. I think it was because I left top on for too long.
I was barely using the keyboard, just watching network monitoring stuff.
Everything else was working fine except the keyboard would not work.
I had to log in via ssh from my laptop and reboot. That's not the first time that has happened either.
I love using linux much more than I ever enjoyed using Windows. Windows 9x was always a lot more unstable. All kinds of things went wrong all the time.
However, that is not to say that linux is impervious. It isn't. I have had freezes and crashes. It' not my hardware either. I have a very solid and high quality system.
./ers tend to treat linux like some kind of holy grail. It's just a tool, and it's not a perfect one either. It's just the best one for the money as far as I'm concerned.
I'm still waiting for my Crystal sound chip to work on my laptop, and for my Hauppauge TV card to start working. It will at some point. At some point I will want a new computer too.
This is a good point. But I hope everyone can have access to these. Then we can spy on the cops high fiving each other, spanking each other on the ass, and otherwise reinacting in the locker room how they 'kicked some ass'.
Privacy is relative, but in a legal sense it applies only to the government.
We don't want powerful governments in this country. While this is not how it is implemented, the bill of rights is a limit on governmental power.
You may spy on me. But when Uncle Sam does it is an illegal invasion of my private interests in relation to the governmental interests.
Of course these devices make law enforcement's job easier. The SS loved it when they could storm houses, loot belongings and turn up whatever chargeable evidence of anything conceivably illegal.
In the US power emanates from the citizens (in theory). The justification that these devices are OK for the police to use because it brings in the bad guys (and I'm not a bad guy, don't do bad things, so they can watch me) is very very very foolish. It's foolish because it tells the government the following "go ahead and do whatever you want; I trust you." Governmental interests are not always your interests. It is those times when governmental intersts are in conflict with your interests that the Bill of Rights must be waived like a flag.
Your trust is misplaced. Authority must be questioned, kept in check, and constantly scrutinized. They must be forced to justify every action. Efficiency is not at the core of democracy; it is at the core of totalitarianism. We need to decide what we hate more private criminals or governmental ones.
Ompages.com is an unincorporated association that seeks to develop publically available privacy policies and technologies implemented across the network. Join. Help. Save the world. The network needs you.
I am no linux expert. I have set up and use ssh quite a lot on my network. I something like setting up ssh is a problem for you, then you really ought to consider installing debian. A simple 'apt-get install ssh' handles it all for you. It's a 3 min download and a 5 second install. That's it. X11 forwarding, etc, etc....
I understand your remarks about PGP being difficult. You are right, but what is the alternative? Making some mua do everything automatically creates security holes and other security no no's.
You want you password cached so that you don't have to remember it? Well is that little cache file secure?
I'm glad to see other countries taking privacy so seriously, I worry about the U.S. It's not just the government, many many Americans are too reliant on corporations for their daily necessities. Sometimes you just have to hunker down and learn it yourself.
If you want control over yourself and your love-ones, you really have to take it. Don't ask for it. Don't say, "please Mr. CEO write something easier for me...' Don't be weak. Read. Learn. Work. It's time.
where the daily operations are open and controlled by the users. Simply having the people open to public (pubic) view is not open at all. It's simply voyeristic.
Two-bit shiesters come a dime a dozen on the internet. When will we work together to achieve the collaboration capabilites the internet offers. O ya, we are...
The answer to this problem will be whether or not your configure your network properly. To do that one's network of computers (and friends) must span the globe. Servers must be colocated. Encryption strong and ubiquitous. The freedom fighters of the 21st Century put down the gun, got an alias and started networking for their own security.
ompages.com is an example. It' not the answer to everything, it is an attempt to model the next society. It will come.
People are signing up to help everday. Mirrors, applications, web services are coming, and they are going to be free, anonymous, and no advertisements allowed.
This is an open source project so we need help.
Whether you are a hacker, engineer, web designer, writer, are just curious, there is a something to be done.
As you all can tell from this article, the US government is moving at top speed to halt computer security for the masses.
Since the US government is acting fast, so must the rest of us. Don't just mumble and grumble about the loss of your rights, use your skills to claim ownership of your rights.
Only you can prevent totalitarianism. You must act, this war is being fought online and without national borders. Wherever you live, the time is now to counteract censorship, government monitoring and control.
This is not a paranoid delusion; if you think it is, then remain as you are and accept that consequences that are indeed mounting.
I will post messages like this on/. for every article that relates to limits on crypto. Flame me if you want. I can take it....
We need to make everything that people already do on the internet encrypted, patented, and licensed under the GPL so that privacy in internet communications is free from profiteering hooligans!
Slashdot Mirror
The Aussies are going to have a hell of a time enforcing these rules. It is too easy to remote admin a server used for web publising. One can own several servers across the globe, employ colocation, etc. The only laws governing the internet that will ever really have "bite" are treaties. The internet is a global phenomenon and can only be governed globally, much like the open seas are now governed by international treaties.
The internet should be officially declared international space. Then we will get some sensible resolutions to the conflicting values inherent in international intercourse. Until that happens, we can safely evaluate all domestic attempts to govern the internet as ineffective. There is no international enforcement mechanism (nor should there be, arguably); but until there is one, moving from violative status to non-violative is a simple matter of pointing the DNS entries to different IPs (in a foreign jurisdiction where the regulations do not apply). This will remain the case for the foreseeable future.
Here is a good story about the nature of the remand. It basically says that the Appeal court agreed to an En Banc hearing to evaluate the merits of Bernstein in light of the new BXA regulations on crypto. However, since this case was about speach, my prediction is that 9th Circuit will uphold the panel's decision. Requiring a 'license' to speak is hardly different under 1st Amend jurisprudence than disallowing it. I expect the BXA to be embarrassed again.
Yes, we already trade time. (i.e., you give me some firewall, I give you some load balancing, boom bam we have a deal).
We need a way to trade time. What's the deal with all this sales of goods? This is a services economy. Some of us do seek to address this issue.
As I have predicted the government will continue to act more and more like a private corporation. It really has no other choice. Privatization is a means of survival in our new world of extremely rapid change. The public too must privatize. There should be family corporations that exist to nurture the family's investments. The corporate form will continue to proliferate at a fast pace. Those who do not take advantage of the benefits of the corporate form will endure increasing liabilities, i.e., privacy intrusions.
Ok so they have something in common with the rest of us.
Here's something they don't have in common with the rest of us.
When the Congress subpoenas information from you company usually a letter from lawyers that says 'sorry, atty client privilege' is not sufficient to end the inquiry.
Ok so they have something in common with the rest of us.
Here's something they don't have in common with the rest of us.
When the Congress subpoenas information from your company usually a letter from lawyers that says 'sorry, atty client privilege' is not sufficient to end the inquiry.
IIRC when networksolutions.com was rs.internic.net didn't *.org sites mean the site was a non-profit enterprise?
With Andover.net's IPO should slashdot.org become slashdot.com? Not to reign in on Taco's parade, but he sells stuff on this site (i.e., slow banner ads). There's nothing *.org about this site anymore.
Just an observation.
What if we could build a public network built on IPv6? Would it be useful? The benefit to society would be increased privacy the cost would be the need for people to eschew complacency.
Solution: infringe on everyone's patents and
copyright *but* earn no profit from it. One will
thus be rendered judgment proof.
Oya, the person who submitted this article seems to imply copyrights are somehow more palatable than patents. I can't think of a reason why since copyright monopolies last for the life of the author plus 70 years versus the 20 for a patent. Also, it is harder to obtain a patent. Perhaps he is just referring to the lunacy of the current patent administrators in their patenting of obvious ideas with much prior art. This is different than saying patents are more invidious than copyrights. In the sofware arena, the distinction between copyrights and patents nearly disappears. Where copyrights apply to specific works of authorship and patents apply to ideas registered with the USPTO in the specified manner, in software both works of authorship and the ideas are so easy to duplicate and proliferate that enforcing monopolies of the fruits of intellect becomes impracticable.
Prediction: the only workable way to regulate the internet will be to treat it as a separate legal jurisdiction, much like we do with international waters. It will be governed by treaties rather than domestic regulations. In this context an international standards body will determine patentablity and copyrightablity. This will lead to more equitable rules on the subject. Because the need for this method of regulation will emerge from a perceived impracticability in regulating the thing we will see a minimalist approach to regulation (i.e., similar to Hong Kong's laissez faire policies).
This is true. Swiss banks have disclosure treaties with the US and the EU as a condition of joining the united Europeans.
Carribeans are the new Switzerlands.
With the recent news I can image a scary but realistic sci-reality.
People who except the mark will receive, not only food and shelter (as approved members of the New Society), but rejuventated neurons and benign nano-viruses that will search for errors in their genetic code and fix them all. Others will modify the person's genes to give them precedented health strength and intelligence. Finally, these people will receive fetal stem-cell treatment over the course of their lives to replace parishable cells with immortal ones. As an added bonus these people will be awarded genetically engineered and cloned automaton slaves to service needs of sex, labor, and comfort.
Meanwhile, the rest of the population (like all people who do not excepte the tatoo) will be allowed to starve and die from nanomachines and nano-viruses designed to kill them and decompose their bodies into basic non-polluting carbons and nitrogens that will be used to fertilize the global re-greenification project.
Sound impossible? You don't read /. enough if you think so.
Here's what I will do: Run for the hills; try to disappear; shoot first ask questions later. Oh shit! I hope nothing even close to this ever happens.
The way to bypass the need for a 'product' i.e., a software package that encrypts files; is for trusted users of a network to participate in VPN with IPSec and SSH. These keys change on a daily basis.
Then the members of the VPN would utilize a distributed.net that works in the inverse; i.e., it cranks out huge keys on the fly using the power of all the processors on the network.
The internet is a public place. We need to build up the private areas and make them fortified and barracaded.
In addition, these trusted servers (that would ulimately reside at various points on the globe would have colocation for one another's encrypted data. That way data could be transferred instantly around the globe upon the trigger of some event (i.e., 5 incorrect passwd entries) or some command (i.e., paging the server with a certain numerical code). Then the data on the investigated computer would be transferred to a safe location and the investigated box would be wiped.
Finally, we can take advantage of the 'bankers' exception to this bill by keeping banking and financial information on the home server. That is all credit card transactions would be routed through the home server to the participating banking institution; thus, making the home server function as an extension of the banking institution's computer network. Alternatively, we should found an online credit-union and make all our home servers part of that enterprise.
We know what to do and we are doing it.
Many people have strong opinions about this. But this is exactly the kind of event that we as a community should have an open patent and trademark portfolio. Linus should have something to say about this trademark claim though.
Bumping heads with people like this is inevitable. He just have to be lions and be brave and fight the good fight. There is no way around it.
See, what we are trying to do at ompages.com is to adjust networking services to according to the legal setting. The adjustment requires a cultural change. We really must take control over our networking services. There should be one networked server per household. Every business and banking transaction should be controlled by the individual's server (which is in his/her physical possession). Here, 'control' means physical control. How does this pertain to patents?
In the Open Source licensing arena, taking control over one's networking services is also taking control of the source code. Here 'control' means 'ownership.' Our theory is that it is not enough for the source code that runs the network to be open. The network links themselves should be as open as possible, and every part of putting a server on the internet should be open. It should not be costly or technically difficult to put a home server on the internet. From email servers to DNS to web servers, all these should facilitate the individuals presence on the internet. The presence should, in turn, represent ownership and control over one's communicated information. The model we live by now entrusts our communicated information to corporate entities that have interests adverse to our own. Namely, we as individuals have an interest in ownership and control over our communicated information and so do the corporations. Just like it is not possible for two people to have an identical ownership interest in a plot of land, it is not possible for two legal persons to have an identical interest in communicated information (unless there is some kind of agreement between the parties). Now, the agreements exist, but the alternative not to agree prevents one from using internet services.
The patent issue is part and parcel of this arrangement. The industry trend is for corporations to have greater and greater control over all aspects of communicated information (i.e., from the idea to the source code to the network services). The Open Source, FSF, etc. movement is helping take back the source code. But this is not enough to achieve freedom on the internet.
What patents do is they allow a legal person (corporations included) to own a monopoly over an idea or a process. The internet is one big mix of processes! Any one of these processes could potentially be patented! There are three ways to curtail the patent intrusions. 1) Abolish patents (completely and utterly unfeasible); 2) Adjust the statutes/case law to exclude software patents from the patentability of 'processes' (feasible but will take a long, long... time); 3) Hackers (and hacker organizations) should rush to the patent office and self-patent everything they do and release the patent under a DFSG-free license (this is the best solution because it keeps the process in the public domain without the risk of corporate opportunism, but it entails organization of efforts to fund the filing fees. Since filing fees are very high by most standards, the organization that facilitates the filings should combine process patents to include as many processes as possible in a single filing).
What licenses like the GPL do is they take legal monopolies (i.e., copyright, patent and trademark) and turn them on their heads. In effect, they say "I own a monopoly on this thing. Because I own this monopoly, I can do anything I choose with it. I choose to let anyone use thing in anyway they want as long as they show everybody." So far, this licensing scheme has only had effect on copyrights. Copyrights are different from patents because the come into existence the moment the author writes down the content (fixes it in a tangible medium of expression), and filing with the Copyright Office is optional. On the other hand, patents only come into existence when a 'claim' is filed, reviewed, and a patent is issued. Trademarks come into existence in sort of a hybrid of the ways patents and copyrights do. The point is that licenses of patented software processes *could* operate just like they do with copyrights on source code, but there are added legal and monetary hurdles to overcome (i.e., filings, and paying fees). Through organization, these hurdles can be assailed.
I some others work daily on ompages.com to achieve the lofty and difficult goals of obtaining and maintaining individual freedoms on the internet. We are not a public interest group. We are working on software and network infrastructure. Anyone can participate. We are not a commercial group. We seek to allow individuals greater control over *all* communications, including commercial communications. I think it's time for us to work on organizing ourselves to take control of patentable processes. I will post a proposal to be announced.
Pardon me if you feel this is an inappropriate forum to advertise a website. I don't see it that way. No, not at all. The way I see it (and many others as well) is that ompages.com is simply a model. We are modeling how a secure, freedom enhancing network should work. Freedom necessarily involves legal BS which is why a professional legal BS'er (in training) has been contributing to this website. We need hackers, web and graphic designers, network administrators, and even barbers, truckers and gardeners to get involved and stay involved. What's exciting about this project is that it is realistic and feasible. Sign up on mailing lists at and participate and you will learn about software packages that will allow you to put your server on the internet (like dhis.org), but with added legal protections coming soon. Basically we have been about a publically accessible secure wide area network (or VPN). Now I think we will also be about patenting every possible networkable process and freeing up the patent with a DFSG/free license. We are looking at the big picture here, and patents are part of it. Once you all apprehend and contemplate what we are trying to do here you will see that it is an extension of the Free Software/Open Source movement. The underlying issue that binds us is freedom. In our project, we are merely trying to adjust the movement to include networking services in an international legal setting. It is no easy task, but neither was the Linux kernel. I truly believe that if the efforts of ompages.com (or similar projects) do not receive widespread development we will have all this nice, freely available software but nothing legal to do with it, except sign an agreement with Corporation X for it to control our lives for a fee (oversimplification intended). I can't predict the future, but I can see a problematic trend. So, there really is no drawback to these efforts.
A vigilant defendant will be wary of the "ferreting effect." It's arbitary enforcement with punitive standards. It builds a fear of the enforcer because all the lawful law breakers are made examples.
The American just system is written to be accusatorial. This is where the government can only allege and accuse. The standard of proof for physical and testimonial evidence in criminal cases is 'guild beyond a reasonable doubt.'
The European system of justice is inquisitorial in nature. In the inquisitorial system one is guilty before proven innocent.
"The inquisitorial system rests on values of efficiency and accuracy, and it is based on trust of authority."
"The accusatorial system rests on a distrust of government and trust of the common man to make fact finding decisions. It is also based on checks and balances. It exhalts the rights of the individual instead of the rights of the government." (Judge Tochterman, McGeorge School of Law, Aug. 1999).
Which system do you prefer? If you prefer the inquisitorial system, which is efficient and accurate, but rests on trust of authority, perhaps you would favor a complete re-vamping of the Constitution?
You have absolutely the right attitude. This is a power for the people by the people only if the people hold on to it tightly, and strike down anyone who would take that power away.
We must engage in character assassination of all government employees who engage in illegal behavior. They must be discredited.
I hope all the privacy sue groups sue like mad if this ever gets off the desk. If this is not the limit to which the 4th Amendment can be eroded, I don't know what is. I might as well go live in an anarchistic unruly 3rd World country rather than live in this Police State.
I really hope everyone starts hitting ompages.com and people, programmers, sys-admins, and web developers start volunteering and taking leadership roles in that public privacy networking project. If any court allow breaking and entering by government officials into my home, I will move out of the US the first opportunity I get.
Searches of homes without Probable Cause is outrageous. A warrant is still required. These officers are trying to search a person's home in search of probable cause. This is utterly unacceptable. Anyone who believes that is a justifiable practice on the part of law enforcement should really think long and hard about the kind of country they want to live in. These practices were just fine in Soviet Russia or in present day China. Did we really win the Cold War so that our law enforcement would be the only ones with all the power? Was the Cold War really a fight for world dominance between the KGB and CIA/FBI/DOJ? I'm starting to think it was.
The only outcome that this kind of activity would create is many many more shootouts with private citizens. The fact that the Gov would even ask for such power makes this a sad, sad, sad day to be an American.
If this type of governmental activity begins no American will have the right to call him or herself a free person. No one will have the right to name America a Democracy, or free. The rights of the individual will finally have been replaced by the government's wanton pursuit of power.
The effort to make the internet as secure as possible for everyone's freedom's sake should dwarf the effort the make linux as easy to use as Windows.
I don't give a DAMN about Windows. I want a secure network dammit! If we don't unite efforts to combat the government by making encryption of everything on the network pervasive, then we will have cheated ourselves out of our freedoms, identities, self-respect. Let the corporations hack linux; its there now. Newsflash!: The revolution is here, and it will not be televised. It's on the network. Drop all coding efforts for all those packages. Put them on hold. All community effort must be geared to counteract these underhanded government activities. If you fail to act now; you are a sheep and you will be sheered and slaughtered.
It's fine to work on fun 3Dfx, and other cool technology. But we must get our priorities straight now or forever lose our freedom. Imagine how powerful the Linux movement would become if the people who have been hacking kernels and GPL apps outsources the work to the corporations working to make Linux more corp friendly and begin making Linux a powerful public tool to secure privacy, speech, and privilege. Focusing on corporate acceptance of Linux is a job for corporations like Red Hat. They seek to profit from Linux. I seek to make Linux the primary tool by which I gain control over my speech. Isn't that what this is all about? If you all want 'geek' and 'nerd' to ever achieve positive connotations you all must accept your duty to be warriors for the people. You are warriors. You have that power. Be heroes and heroines. Don't be sheep.
Today my keyboard stopped working. I think it was because I left top on for too long.
I was barely using the keyboard, just watching network monitoring stuff.
Everything else was working fine except the keyboard would not work.
I had to log in via ssh from my laptop and reboot. That's not the first time that has happened either.
I love using linux much more than I ever enjoyed using Windows. Windows 9x was always a lot more unstable. All kinds of things went wrong all the time.
However, that is not to say that linux is impervious. It isn't. I have had freezes and crashes. It' not my hardware either. I have a very solid and high quality system.
./ers tend to treat linux like some kind of holy grail. It's just a tool, and it's not a perfect one either. It's just the best one for the money as far as I'm concerned.
I'm still waiting for my Crystal sound chip to work on my laptop, and for my Hauppauge TV card to start working. It will at some point. At some point I will want a new computer too.
This is a good point. But I hope everyone can have access to these. Then we can spy on the cops high fiving each other, spanking each other on the ass, and otherwise reinacting in the locker room how they 'kicked some ass'.
Privacy is relative, but in a legal sense it applies only to the government.
We don't want powerful governments in this country. While this is not how it is implemented, the bill of rights is a limit on governmental power.
You may spy on me. But when Uncle Sam does it is an illegal invasion of my private interests in relation to the governmental interests.
Of course these devices make law enforcement's job easier. The SS loved it when they could storm houses, loot belongings and turn up whatever chargeable evidence of anything conceivably illegal.
In the US power emanates from the citizens (in theory). The justification that these devices are OK for the police to use because it brings in the bad guys (and I'm not a bad guy, don't do bad things, so they can watch me) is very very very foolish. It's foolish because it tells the government the following "go ahead and do whatever you want; I trust you." Governmental interests are not always your interests. It is those times when governmental intersts are in conflict with your interests that the Bill of Rights must be waived like a flag.
Your trust is misplaced. Authority must be questioned, kept in check, and constantly scrutinized. They must be forced to justify every action. Efficiency is not at the core of democracy; it is at the core of totalitarianism. We need to decide what we hate more private criminals or governmental ones.
Ompages.com is an unincorporated association that seeks to develop publically available privacy policies and technologies implemented across the network. Join. Help. Save the world. The network needs you.
I am no linux expert. I have set up and use ssh quite a lot on my network. I something like setting up ssh is a problem for you, then you really ought to consider installing debian. A simple 'apt-get install ssh' handles it all for you. It's a 3 min download and a 5 second install. That's it. X11 forwarding, etc, etc....
I understand your remarks about PGP being difficult. You are right, but what is the alternative? Making some mua do everything automatically creates security holes and other security no no's.
You want you password cached so that you don't have to remember it? Well is that little cache file secure?
I'm glad to see other countries taking privacy so seriously, I worry about the U.S. It's not just the government, many many Americans are too reliant on corporations for their daily necessities. Sometimes you just have to hunker down and learn it yourself.
If you want control over yourself and your love-ones, you really have to take it. Don't ask for it. Don't say, "please Mr. CEO write something easier for me...' Don't be weak. Read. Learn. Work. It's time.
where the daily operations are open and controlled by the users. Simply having the people open to public (pubic) view is not open at all. It's simply voyeristic.
Two-bit shiesters come a dime a dozen on the internet. When will we work together to achieve the collaboration capabilites the internet offers. O ya, we are...
The internet has caused quite a sensation!
One these sensations is loss of power.
The answer will not be which party you vote for.
The answer to this problem will be whether or not your configure your network properly. To do that one's network of computers (and friends) must span the globe. Servers must be colocated. Encryption strong and ubiquitous. The freedom fighters of the 21st Century put down the gun, got an alias and started networking for their own security.
ompages.com is an example. It' not the answer to everything, it is an attempt to model the next society. It will come.
Check out ompages.com. I've worked on some papers that explain what the problem is and how to fix it.
People are signing up to help everday. Mirrors, applications, web services are coming, and they are going to be free, anonymous, and no advertisements allowed.
This is an open source project so we need help.
Whether you are a hacker, engineer, web designer, writer, are just curious, there is a something to be done.
As you all can tell from this article, the US government is moving at top speed to halt computer security for the masses.
Since the US government is acting fast, so must the rest of us. Don't just mumble and grumble about the loss of your rights, use your skills to claim ownership of your rights.
Only you can prevent totalitarianism. You must act, this war is being fought online and without national borders. Wherever you live, the time is now to counteract censorship, government monitoring and control.
This is not a paranoid delusion; if you think it is, then remain as you are and accept that consequences that are indeed mounting.
I will post messages like this on /. for every article that relates to limits on crypto. Flame me if you want. I can take it....
see ompages.com to break a patent
on the obvious idea of webmail that handles encryption keys that ziplip.com seeks to monopolize.
Free thought, free speech, anonymity, security, freedom!!!
Cool! Contact me. This is excellent.
We need to make everything that people already do on the internet encrypted, patented, and licensed under the GPL so that privacy in internet communications is free from profiteering hooligans!