@ Anonymous Coward
"Don't you ever get tired of being the village idiot?"
Maby it's a generational problem. :)
Hey! Are you "the" Anonymous Coward? I think we went to school together.
2726 publicly visible posts • joined 27 Apr 2007
There are plenty of obvious reasons why we should all learn to ride a bicycle and take up physically constructive skills like fixing, rather than buying, things.
The longer we keep discussing scientific issues and policies, the longer we have to still drive our cars to work, buy cheap unrepairable goods, eat food with high transportation costs, and watch TV.
I wonder if this thing works with LastFM which requires a password. How do you enter data? Anyway, if I had $200 to spend on an alarm clock obviously I wouldn't need to get up in the morning, so what's this thing for anyway? Paris doesn't need one and the rest of us are OK with the $1 quartz from the 5 and 10.
If you can't unencrypt the files then how do you prove that the Customs and Border Protection inspector is telling the truth?
Since the files were copied peer-to-peer, if they do get unencrypted then could the inspector(s) not be charged with distributing child pron?
People often get nervous or confused when under pressure. How do you prove that the suspect can remember the password?
@ Steve: Thanks for clearing that up. It's fixed now, but it was on by default as David Shepherd had mentioned above. I find it a bit disheartening that Linksys would do that. Maby thats a good reason for switching to Tomato like Steve Pettifer did. (same Steve?)
I find these kinds of menus confusing. My eyes aren't what they used to be and it's easy to fool me with amateurish layout and odd vocabulary such as putting UPnP with passwords instead of with port forwarding. You'd think a company like Linksys would take a more professional approach.
I'm a bit confused by comments about this model. Mine is about 2yr old and running the original firmware (v4.30.7) and it does not have any UPnP that I can find. Supposedly it is listed under "Applications & Gaming" but I can't find anything. I was thinking this would be the time to change the firmware, but maby I'll just leave well enough alone.
There is something strange going on here. It's scary when these big companies get together to conspire against the public. Why would AT&T have any interest in P2P or copyrights? Do they stand to make any money from filtering, or do they just belong to the same church? Do they want to kill the fast growing P2P email?
Why so many explorers? I know many people, even adults, find it entertaining to play with games, but why do it while driving? I really don't beleive that there are so many people who are actually lost or don't know where they are going. That would be pathetic. In your own area, you know all the roads, how the trafic goes, what lane to be in when, and so on. If you have any need for Sat-Nav you must be a tourist. That's OK, but if you are just playing games and pretending to be lost, then Sat-Nav isn't the kind of reality check you need.
I used to live on a narrow residential city street which, as general traffic increased and drivers got ruder, started to get annoyingly busy just after work time. Bad drivers who didn't live there would take "shortcuts". We used to just find local uses for the street, such as car washing, and encouraging the kids to set up their nets and play street hockey. The people in the neighbourhood wouldn't care, everybody is freindly, but anybody taking a shortcut who would have to wait for us to finish/move would learn to go elsewhere. I don't understand the tolerance that some people have for agressive motorists who don't belong. It's easy to just leave your car in the road, put up the hood (bonnet) and go have a cup of coffee while the idiots are honking outside. Personally, I'm always respectful of other people's neighbourhoods and try to stick to main roads when not at home.
Even the writer of this article says "Most private investigators come from a police or forces background." So what? Now more will be comming from an IT background. Anybody interested can google "how to become a PI" and you'll see that there are all types of people with a wide array of skills in the field. The author goes on to say "expecting computer forensics experts to have a PI licence makes about as much sense as requiring PIs to have computer science degrees." Hello? How hard is it to get a PI license? I know it varies from area to area, but the basic requirement is that you are bondable and know the basic laws. If a computer forensics person is going to skip a beat over that one, then he/she probably shouldn't be in that business. In fact if you're not willing or able to take legal responsibility for your actions, you probably shouldn't be in any business. It's no more outragious than asking automobile drivers to get a drivers license. Certainly getting a license for being a professiional investigator is not going to take years of education and you won't need any "police or forces background" either. I think some people have been watching too much TV.
I think many people are misunderstanding the situation. Do you really think that Intel was trying to be helpful? Blaming Negroponte is a red herring. Intel planned to quit the project before the show in Las Vegas otherwise they would have come up with a competetive solution and not a more expensive and power hungry chip. Don't tell me they didn't understand the design criteria. They've got the technical ability, but instead they decided to put their talents elsewhere.
There is always a government/corporate interest in taking control away from the populace and giving it to their friends. I know it doesn't make sense in a digital world because resources can be created out of nothing, but I can see them working at it for a long time to come.
A few years back we started to see the same thing happening with chemicals and various kinds of physical matter. It became difficult to get uranium compounds for pottery and glasswork. Acids of various kinds had to be gotten from a chemical supply house who often required you to show a commercial laboratory license. More recently it has become difficult to get nitrates. Experimenters, and even everyday gardeners, are having a difficult time getting what used to be common chemicals. Many suppliers won't even sell relatively beneign compounds if they contain lead. Funnily enough, should you want to, you can still easily purchase some of the most dangerous, but less commonly know, poisons. Go figure. With a little difficulty, over the years, I've been able to source my needs (with the exception of uranium for glaze) but it gets increasingly difficult. There is definately a strong government desire to keep technology away from people.
It's all a bunch of bullshit brought on by politicians who say they are making the world a safer place. That's not happening, but the loss of individual freedom is.
I've ridden on the old Japanese bullet train. The most striking thing is the quiet smoothness. There is no clakety clakety and very little wiggle or vibration in the coaches. That is why they can go so fast. The tracks are welded and the ties are concrete, unlike the old wooden ones we use here in Canada which would rattle the train apart at any speed fast enough to get you home by suppertime.
I would guess that the reason for using maglev and getting rid of the rails is to get rid of vibration so that higher speeds can be acheived. You can always apply more power to overcome resistance, but you can't do it safely if there is vibration. Effiency is not the issue here. Speed is. The reason for higher speeds is so that it takes less time to get somewhere, effectively bringing cities closer together.
As others have pointed out, rolling resistance is always low. Air resistance, however, goes up as the cube of the speed. It takes 8 times more energy to go 20mph than it does to go 10mph. Anybody who has ever tried to go fast on a bicycle will know this first hand!
That's the point that many people seem to miss. It is not legal to let other people hear your copyrighted recordings, and it also not legal to perform these same works in public such as humming them while walking down the street. As to whether it is legal to just remember the music is perhaps a grey area. You can get away with humming a song to yourself but that is only because of the underdeveloped level of surveillance. That may change. It is only because of the gracious attitude of the RIAA that we are able to get away with those things now.
The fact is that most people hide their illegal behavior and put on a different face in public. Those who preach otherwise had better not ever have played a copyrighted CD in the presence of others, ie. non-rights holders.
Personally I think copyright law is a pile of sh*t. People who follow rules like that are the same ones who, as pedestrians, wait for a red light when there is no traffic in sight. Get a grip.
Is the RIAA handing out fashion citations? I thought that in the USA, where this story is taking place, they have the Audio Home Recording Act or does this not apply this week?
Here in Canada we pay a levy on blank media which allows us to make all the copies we want. The copies are "pre paid" as it were. Perhaps harddrives don't count as "blank" media, however the Copyright Act allows copies of sound recordings for non-commercial use. This could change of course, since all these laws are not really "laws" in as much as they don't stay the same for any appreciable length of time. As an older person I find these fashions tiresome. I can't really take these laws seriously, especially since they are meant to control what I do in the privacy of my own home.
"What is being "stolen" is the "right" to make copies and distribute the music."
That is not true. With copyright infringement, the copyright holder still keeps ALL the original rights. I find it difficult to fathom how you could think they would loose any of those rights when someone copies their music.
However, when you say "I don't think it's going away." and "mainstream music is chiefly commoditized ...", so people "feel no connection to the artists." then I'm with you all the way. Even disregarding the quality of the music, many people don't value it, nor the artists, that much. That's the audience. Most people take music for granted. For good or for bad, we're going to have to find a way to live with that.
Tom: I never play records when someone comes to visit because it is illegal to do so. Unless my visitor can prove that he has paid in full and has the legal right to listen to the same tracks, either the music stays off, or out my visitor goes. It is very important to not share music unless it is in a completely safe and legal manner.
Dick: I play my own music instead, but I'm afraid the neighbours could be listening so I sit at the piano and hammer randomly in order to avoid playing something which sounds in the least like anything I've ever heard before. I'm afraid that if someone were to hear a recognizable phrase, they would turn me in.
Harry: I don't go out in public much any more and when I do, I wear three pairs of ear plugs so that if someone is playing a copyrighted recording I will be unable to hear it. I don't want to take any chances on breaking any copyright laws. I certainly don't want to burn in hell.
Anon: Naw, f*** that shit. I just crank it so you can hear it down the block. The neighbours can't complain because if they did, they would have to admit that they heard it, and then they would be violating the copyright, and they know I'd turn them in.
@Kaleberg: You can get dimmable ones now. I just tried a flood light on a dimmer. It is supposed to be dimmable to 10% (and it looks like it is) but it's too finiky because it only works on the first half turn of the pot so a special dimer would have to be made to make it practical. Perhaps such things are avilable, but adding a resistor in series with the pot would give an acceptable control range. Since most people don't do technical stuff, they would probably not be able to use these bulbs as advertised.
Regarding brightness: I've had dim CFLs, but recent ones are plenty bright. However, if you want bright, why would you use bulbs? It seems to me that if you really want to see, you should be using tubes, preferably in a bank to reduce shadows. I've got one room with 16 4 foot tubes across the ceiling. I don't use them for long periods of time, but when I really want to see something I can. The rest of the time I run a number of 15 and 25 watt incandescents in carefully placed decorative fixtures.
@Peter W: I just checked my last bill and the cost has gone up to $.06879 /KWh here on the west side of Canada. I thought that was high enough since we're all hydro over here, I didn't realize that the cost was so high in the UK. I do agree that $300 a year is getting to be up there where some of it could be better spent on something else.
@everybody: still noboby has mentioned ultraviolet radiation and the damage it does to many objects. Almost all CFLs produce destructive amounts. I still think this is the silent killer when it comes to the long term economics of CFLs.
Does anybody have a calculator and know how to use it? Where's the monetary saving to the consumer?
I run a lot of lights because I've got three floors and outbuildings where I move around and don't always turn the lights on and off every time I move. I also like the look of nice lighting, which is the main reason I run a lot of lights in the first place. There's around 300 to 400 watts running for 12 hours a day. I beleive many people use less. The cost here is 6 cents a KWH so, correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't that mean that even if I don't turn my lights on at all, that all I would save is 25 cents a day?
Either I need to get myself a new calculator or people are confused about the savings.
As someone who beleives in conservation, this could look like a plot to destroy our heritage. Perhaps for the purpose of selling cheap modern replacements. Maby even to discourage art and culture in general. We are being lied to. Think I'm crazy? You're probably right, but not for the reasons you might think.
There are some serious issues being completely ignored. Just do a search on these comments for ultraviolet and you'll see what I mean. Do the same with CFL and ultraviolet on Google and you'll get the same result. EVERYONE is ignoring the damage caused by these bulbs! You will find that your woodwork, paintings, works on paper, fabrics (antique or otherwise) and other valuable household items will quickly be compromised. No one is supplying filters for these lights. What are we supposed to do. Live in empty houses? I personally can't survive without a lot of art and antiques in my home and I hope to pass these things on to future generations. I'm not the only one who refuses to live in a jail like setting of empty walls and no books, just so I can use politically correct lighting.
I use all kinds of lighting and have found there are, in fact, some advantages to CFLs in some situations. They are actually pretty interesting, and yes, they have solved many of the original problems with them, but the fact still remains, they will destroy much of your household belongings if you are not really careful.
"By pure chance, a particular frequency of microwave radiation can agitate water molecules"
You can get resonance in the range of 20 Gigs, that is not the operative effect here. Home ovens operate around 2.4 and will make most things hot simply because they absorb the radiation. Some commercial ovens work at 915 Megs. If you're not technically oriented enough to know this stuff, may I introduce you to Google? Check out magnetron and dielectric heating. In the meanwhile, perhaps I can sell you a ... oh never mind.
"Is anybody fooled by Microsoft's transparent ploys to force bloated, poorly "designed" "standards" on the rest of the world? Does anybody *not* think that their only goal is to ensure that nothing works properly with the standard except Microsoft tools?"
Yes! The Danish government IT leadership just confirmed today that they are ready for "open standards" in 13 days. Two of the "standards" they are talking about, and which will be rolled out January 1 are Open Office, and Open XML. Hello? Hello? .... sorry, I thought we lost the connection.... ayway ... The Danish Government and, it seems, most of Danish IT are completely convinced that Open XML is a standard. Aparently ISO has no validity in that country. From what I can read on the net, the Danish IT world is completly, and religiously, devoted to MicroSoft. It's pathetic. What many people would have thought of as a technologically advanced country, is really just a third world puppet show when it comes to IT.
This is just a pile of bureaucratic shit. All that will happen is the creation of more useless government jobs and more silly devices made and sold. Animals are already tagged and farmers know who they buy from. If there is a health problem it will probably show up after the ID has been removed anyway. Sheep are born, raised, and then sent to the abetoire all in less than a year, so they are generally not bought and sold more than once. On top of it all, unlike cattle, sheep and goats are raised in fenced off areas, so they don't get lost or end up in strange places.
I've been a musician for nearly half a century and I don't have a need to download recordings. Mostly because I think, play, and sing music all day. I don't see anything wrong with people copying CDs, or downloading music. This has little to do with music and much to do with a way to make money. We all need to make a living and where the money comes from is not always so relevant. Perhaps it should be. In the case of musicians making money from the playing of their recordings that is only one option and not a very honorable one in my mind. I expect to pay a musician when he plays not when he is not. Keep in mind that all music is highly derivative and built on the work of all those that came before. Music without reference is noise. The "meaningfulness" comes from recognision of past concepts. I understand that software is similar, the bits have to have meaning, and the meaning comes from reference to previous ideas. For example, the person who invented adding doesn't claim IP.
This whole "copy" thing is crazy. This has gone way, way, too far and become way too abstract. We need to get back to earth. Many people will listen to a song and remember it. They might even hum it on the way home. A musician might go home and play it, or use parts of it... even without conciously doing so. Am I supposed to forget it? Can I not tell someone else what I heard. I copy things in my mind, is that illegal? Will they cut off my head to do a forensic search?
The only thing that makes sense is to pay artists when they are working and not when they are not. Play it again and I'll pay you again. I have little respect for those that try to make money from copyright. They are just plain lazy and I suspect many don't have the talent to make a legitimate living.
I agree. That's why I'm suggesting physical security. No data is truly safe if there is a connection to the outside world. That means that the people who work there also have to be trustworthy. As for physical security, it's amazing how many places there are where you could just walk in and grab a computer. They might not even notice you right away, and if the (usually plain vanilla) security people complain, you either talk with them or you just make a run for it. Until they have experienced this sort of thing, at least once, they won't be ready. However, I think that in this case they may actually BE secure, since (as Chris Miller points out) it was only the unclassified network which was compromised. So what's the big deal? Perhaps there wasn't really a story here.
PS Chris: I don't mind a little variety in the spelling of my name :)
I don't think I'm being biased when I say that relying on Windows for security is probably unwise, but whatever they use, if they really want to keep data secure, then they shouldn't put it online in the first place, passwords or not. Keep it in the building. Real security is physical security and until they realize that, then this "sooper sekrit" stuff is just a childish game.
If there's others like me, (and I suspect there are) then the Reg could also garner revenue by threatening to go offline, because if I didn't spend all day reading the Reg I'd probably go out and get a job and, as many people would agree, any work place is safer and more productive without me. In fact, I can see a business model where nothing changes, except you end up charging different governments for different reasons... a real win win situation. It's been done before.
I think they'll be careful though. The last time the Quebec police raided a Mohawk blocade at Kanesatake/Oka, One cop was killed in all the shooting that followed (no charges were laid) and there followed a 77 day armed standoff involving 2,000 police and 4,500 Canadian soldiers. I think the Quebec police learned a lesson that time, but they may have forgotten by now. In other words: this could be a problem.
I think they got their numbers wrong. From 3000:1 to 5000:1 is a change of 1.6:1 not 3000:1 which would be a bit extreme. Maby it would be clearer if they simply used normal photographic jargon, ie f-stops, instead of trying to develop new math. That would make it an increase of two thirds of a stop. Still a total of over 12 stops is impressive.
I'm not a nurd, but I often put computers together in my own inimitable way...so when I needed a "normal" computer for my girl friend, in order to get some perceived compatibility with the rest of the world I purchased a new pre-configured Windows machine with XP-home. That was a big expense and not really worth it. I'll never do that again. It mostly works, but when I went to copy the disk to run XP on another machine everything went wrong. I kept getting messages which obviously had nothing to do with the hardware. I eventually gave up and just installed a convenient version of Linux. For an old guy who knows little about computers except DOS and hardware, windows is extremely difficult. You need to know a lot of non technical stuff. I don't know much about Linux either, but ALL the linux distros I've installed since I gave up on DOS 5 years ago, have had installation scripts so I didn't need to. Nor did I have to know anything about company business models or popular politics. (What the **** is a product key and what does it have to do with computers?... anything?) People who say that Windows is easy and Linux is hard are not telling the whole truth. They find it that way because they are used to the style and they understand the business model. They are not including a huge skill set which they already have. Not everyone has the basic skills to understand MSWindows. People are different. Call me stupid, but I can't for the life of me figure out what a "EULA" has to do with computers or electronics, or anything else that I might have an interest in. I think that sort of thing is for lawyers and hairdressers, Each to his own, but if I have to learn about that kind of crap then I'd rather just donate my computers to a museum (or art gallery) and find something more interesting to do.... or just load linux and be done with it because I honestly don't care how many other people are useing it.
For this to work as planned they need to pass a law that terroists are only allowed to use Windows. (Better still: that only terroists are allowed to use Windows.)
I remember in Denmark during the war there used to be a lot of German jokes remeniscent of this theme and here we have the same thing, except this is reality... sigh. Thankfully, there are a lot of smart Germans too. Unfortunately, brains and politics don't mix too well.
I mentioned the Vancouver Police negetively in a previous comment but I must say that one of the problems here is that it was NOT the city police. I beleive that the Vancouver airport is not under city police jurisdiction and that is why the RCMP was called. That was a bad thing. The Vancouver police (despite their occational atrocities as I mentioned earlier) have experience with things like family violence and mentally challanged individuals. In fact they have a special unit to deal with those things and I can vouch for their professional skills because I have seen them in action. The RCMP, on the other hand, do not normally deal with this kind of thing and are prone to take a heavy handed approach. In fact, they have a bad reputation when it comes to non civil problems.
I would also like to say, that after watching the video and seeing the gentleman in question. He looks (looked) like a pretty "normal" stressed person with some serious issues. He did not look at all like a dangerous person. I would have had no fear in dealing with him in that situation. Perhaps wrongly, but I have dealt with many people like that before, and it is not a big deal, and it is not a time for violence.
It should also be mentioned, that Vancouver is an unusually multicultural city. If you need more that one phone call to find someone who speaks Polish, you are not from there.
I won't comment on the difficulty of police work, except to say that in these parts, there are other jobs where the death rate is much higher. Many loggers would argue that police have cushy jobs. As to whether a crazy person is really dangerous, I guess that is cultural.
I have lived almost 50 years in Vancouver and the police have a very bad reputation there. Check out the history of police racism in Vancouver since the 1900's. It looks pretty bad. Yes, they often do good work, but every few years they screw up royally. I've seen undercover cops use billy clubs on tourists and people just passing by, including a pregnant woman. That event caused many lawsuits, police firings, and a general media frenzie. It was eventually forgottne about, but some years later there is another incident... it's a recurring theme. There are many news stories where I can't judge, but excessive force, racism, and plain old bad judgement, are recurring convictions.
A few years ago I moved out of town to a place where the RCMP have jurisdiction. Their shiny national reputation does not extend to rural areas. Here, at least, their work is often sloppy. Our local constabulary was recently caught shooting at a gas station with unsuspecting people inside because someone they were chasing ran in there. No one (miraculously) was hurt and it will just be another investigation. That was a few months ago and people have already forgotten about it. There are many police stories, both good and bad. The problem is the bad ones.
It was Orlowski's articles that first got me interested in the Reg. I enjoy his articles and would like to know what other people think. A private exchange with the author, or comments elsewhere, would not really help me nor the Reg community. I vote for enabled comments on his articles.