this is becoming like the free market of anonymity software! competition means our identities win. the more rocks to over turn, the more administrative overhead is required, and the better the systems the more secure our private communications become. Security through obscurity isn't true security, but it sure helps delay the overlords when everything is obfuscated across multiple channels...
you know those modern police radios, jumping channels at pre-set algorithms, encrypting across them all when possible... can you imagine something that uses all of these secure networks to randomly select paths to endpoints and dynamically adjusts to a new secure network as needed... good luck Department of Homeland Spying
I would be pretty freaked out to see people's faces. Some people have not been blessed in that way and I prefer them on their phone looking away so I can keep my lunch down.
I think there are a few genres of social sites based on how a user can use them: user to user or user to group direct communication (akin to talking face to face), broadcast networking (more like terrestrial radio, you send info out and people may tune in), and stalking (whether familial research or otherwise, like a background check that you can do for free on persons of interest based on how and what they have made available)
I don't know/care how most people will/do accomplish this, but for me, Google's product line covers all needs, but no one app cuts it.
agreed. Chrome is my favorite second browser when my Firefox session needs to be isolated.
Also the security holes is chrome OS are significant due to its low customizations and the fact that most users must compile their own release for a full fledged terminal. One well executed exploit could potentially render many machines compromised.
If the Os gets it functionality from the web (and chromium gets widely adopted) I still won't use it out of concern for man-in-middle attacks
constitutionally, the rights for cyber command-type operations are reserved to the states or the people. so if you want to hack a known bad site, you would be required to comply with state law, but the interesting thing would arise from this: if it wasn't the federal govt's job to do this cyber-protectionism (which the constitution clearly states is not the role of the federal govt) then who would prosecute someone for hacking a known bad site?
imagine this scenario:
i hack a terrorist message board and bring it down permanently
someone from the terrorist organization hires a lawyer and presses charges against me in my home state
i choose to have a jury at my trial
now rather than it being a federal responsibility to say "he hacked something he will go to jail regardless of motivation or the facts" my fate lies in the hands of a jury of peers, who after examining my motives (it was a terrorist group, not protected by the first amendment) and the harm done (terrorists become unable to pass information at the same level of ease) they can choose whether i was breaking law or taking it into my own hands.
in order for the system i am speaking of to function successfully, a fundamental change in what the role of government IS would be necessary. if we want to be strung along and victim to the DMCA provisions, then we dont have to do a damn thing. if we want real change and freedom we are required to take back the inalienable rights that the DMCA has alienated.
when the govt is looking out for us we all lose, i know plenty of people who could for less money do more than what the vague answers of general lord imply that can be done.
what you say is definitely true if we actually had power to change the current office or policies...
i personally am banking on a change coming in the future
i've only had to compile apache once due to custom options - the defualt install on MOST linux OSes just needs to have apache turned on and off she goes
low quality server administrators dont choose to work on the command line, so IIS is a perfect half-ass fit for their needs.
there is no reason not to use apache, and combine this with virtualized networks and windows runs too much overhead to be useful.
If a legitimate copy is not bought within 30 days, the system will curtail functionality much further by restricting users to just the Web browser for an hour at a time
i see this a the SOLUTION to not being on slashdot excessively
i'm not attacking, i was [am] simply saying that someone having written a book (or series of books) is not reason in its own to help them. i reccomend helping them because they are a person and that is the right thing to do.
Please feel free to call me any names you want. Any name you call me because I'm helping out RAW in his time of need, I will consider a badge of honor.
i was not planning on calling anyone any names, but now that you mention it you are a self-proclaimed-honorful-RAW-helper
basically, a transfer is not 100% efficient and heat (enegery) is "lost" (absorbed by the air around the transfer). I suppose it would be arguable that since it can be accounted for in heat, it is not lost, but the common understanding (unless i am not remembering my physics correctly) is that the heat, not being sustainable, is a result of energy not transferred. i dont know, but i believe that this is based int he second law of thermodynamicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_ law_of_thermodynamics
Slashdot Mirror
this is becoming like the free market of anonymity software! competition means our identities win. the more rocks to over turn, the more administrative overhead is required, and the better the systems the more secure our private communications become. Security through obscurity isn't true security, but it sure helps delay the overlords when everything is obfuscated across multiple channels... you know those modern police radios, jumping channels at pre-set algorithms, encrypting across them all when possible... can you imagine something that uses all of these secure networks to randomly select paths to endpoints and dynamically adjusts to a new secure network as needed... good luck Department of Homeland Spying
I would be pretty freaked out to see people's faces. Some people have not been blessed in that way and I prefer them on their phone looking away so I can keep my lunch down. I think there are a few genres of social sites based on how a user can use them: user to user or user to group direct communication (akin to talking face to face), broadcast networking (more like terrestrial radio, you send info out and people may tune in), and stalking (whether familial research or otherwise, like a background check that you can do for free on persons of interest based on how and what they have made available) I don't know/care how most people will/do accomplish this, but for me, Google's product line covers all needs, but no one app cuts it.
echo 'hello world'
agreed. Chrome is my favorite second browser when my Firefox session needs to be isolated. Also the security holes is chrome OS are significant due to its low customizations and the fact that most users must compile their own release for a full fledged terminal. One well executed exploit could potentially render many machines compromised. If the Os gets it functionality from the web (and chromium gets widely adopted) I still won't use it out of concern for man-in-middle attacks
An iceweasel is the opposite of a firefox
Oh, and before anyone accuses me, no, I don't work for Microsoft. I am just open-minded enough to realize that they are a company, not a church. .
good point - churches rob us blind
constitutionally, the rights for cyber command-type operations are reserved to the states or the people. so if you want to hack a known bad site, you would be required to comply with state law, but the interesting thing would arise from this: if it wasn't the federal govt's job to do this cyber-protectionism (which the constitution clearly states is not the role of the federal govt) then who would prosecute someone for hacking a known bad site? imagine this scenario: i hack a terrorist message board and bring it down permanently someone from the terrorist organization hires a lawyer and presses charges against me in my home state i choose to have a jury at my trial now rather than it being a federal responsibility to say "he hacked something he will go to jail regardless of motivation or the facts" my fate lies in the hands of a jury of peers, who after examining my motives (it was a terrorist group, not protected by the first amendment) and the harm done (terrorists become unable to pass information at the same level of ease) they can choose whether i was breaking law or taking it into my own hands. in order for the system i am speaking of to function successfully, a fundamental change in what the role of government IS would be necessary. if we want to be strung along and victim to the DMCA provisions, then we dont have to do a damn thing. if we want real change and freedom we are required to take back the inalienable rights that the DMCA has alienated. when the govt is looking out for us we all lose, i know plenty of people who could for less money do more than what the vague answers of general lord imply that can be done.
what you say is definitely true if we actually had power to change the current office or policies... i personally am banking on a change coming in the future
If we open up social networking and make it a community effort, who gets to sell it for millions?!?!?!
i've only had to compile apache once due to custom options - the defualt install on MOST linux OSes just needs to have apache turned on and off she goes
low quality server administrators dont choose to work on the command line, so IIS is a perfect half-ass fit for their needs. there is no reason not to use apache, and combine this with virtualized networks and windows runs too much overhead to be useful.
how are they going to stop me from photocopying books? prohibition never works
so glad to know that they aren't just trying to find more ways to tax us though!!!
does this take into account that we're all connected on our neighbor's wifi?
Why not forget the deadline and get it right? TFA says this was an exec's idea....go figure
Touche - exactly why my only loyalty is to food.
I dont think that mp3 players deserve loyalty, it is not a country and there is no "Pledge of iPod Allegiance".
Either way, your mom is a hyperlink
I'm not personally about trading one DRM for another
who cares?
From:offshoreprogrammers@US-Tanks.gov Subject:"cI4lis cHeAp"
then why was elgoog.com created at all?
If a legitimate copy is not bought within 30 days, the system will curtail functionality much further by restricting users to just the Web browser for an hour at a time
i see this a the SOLUTION to not being on slashdot excessively
i'm not attacking, i was [am] simply saying that someone having written a book (or series of books) is not reason in its own to help them. i reccomend helping them because they are a person and that is the right thing to do.
Please feel free to call me any names you want. Any name you call me because I'm helping out RAW in his time of need, I will consider a badge of honor.
i was not planning on calling anyone any names, but now that you mention it you are a self-proclaimed-honorful-RAW-helper
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy
_ law_of_thermodynamics
basically, a transfer is not 100% efficient and heat (enegery) is "lost" (absorbed by the air around the transfer). I suppose it would be arguable that since it can be accounted for in heat, it is not lost, but the common understanding (unless i am not remembering my physics correctly) is that the heat, not being sustainable, is a result of energy not transferred. i dont know, but i believe that this is based int he second law of thermodynamicshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second
and we learn this from the most amusing of monkeys: the federal government.