The hash ensures uniqueness, as does the analogous legacy library index. But the misfile is physical. If the hash-identified copy is no longer online, it's gone. So redundancy arises, and with it the need for oceanic tides of data synchronisation, which in turn demand rate-limiting data 'bulkheads'.
Everything in the US seems to be a "war". The war on crime, the war on drugs, the war on terrorism, the war on child sex abuse. Each war provides an excuse based on overwhelming public interest to remove or weaken constitutional rights and protections. None of these wars will ever end, so the effect on rights is permanent. In all these wars the citizen is both victim and enemy. Did you smoke a joint in high school? Then of course you accept random stop and search and the seizure of assets for no particular reason. Did you ever shoplift? Then you know how important it is to throw people in prison for years for non-violent crimes. Did you ever read Playboy? Then you know how vital it is that law enforcement has total access to all your digital media at all times. Because anyone could be one. And no policing power is too extreme to deal with it. We certainly wouldn't want judges and lawyers and, well, law itself, getting in the way.
Because of the self-Streisanding all of this causes the alphabet agencies, it should be obvious that only exceptionally thick perverts would rely on commercial communication encryption. Why bother, when old-fashioned tradecraft is more secure. But that isn't the real aim anyway, is it? And the question remains; it's easy to start a war, but how do you stop it?
The "normal charter" is the Basic Law. There is nothing in the Basic Law about HK being unable to apply "dictatorial" legislation which is precisely the legislation required of it by the Basic Law.
Your analogy has no visible bearing. If HK was "sold down the river" it was by the British government which agreed to the Basic Law. But perhaps you simply object to China reclaiming its own property from the colonial state which took it by force during the Opium Wars.
The US-funded colour revolution failed. Tough. Tell Joshua Wong to give the cash back to NED and the OTF if he hasn't spent it all on weapons and US flags.
Article 23 of the <u>Basic Law</u> governing the HK handover from UK to China states:
<i>The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall enact laws on its own to prohibit any act of treason, secession, sedition, subversion against the Central People's Government, or theft of state secrets, to prohibit foreign political organizations or bodies from conducting political activities in the Region, and to prohibit political organizations or bodies of the Region from establishing ties with foreign political organizations or bodies.</i>
When the HK SAR failed to do this, PRC enacted legislation to make up the deficiency in accordance with Article 18. Not only is this not "in violation" of the Basic Law, it is clearly anticipated by it.
Please do more research to avoid misleading or mendacious claims.
Ignoring the technical feasibility issues for a moment, this reminds me of the introduction of the Dewey Decimal system for library location. Instead of describing availability by location ("American Farm Tractor" by Randy Leffingwell is on floor 3, stack 14, shelf 2) it can be located by subject (631.3.x) anywhere that has a copy. The content with IPFS could be anything but there's always the risk that it will be misfiled. It seems to be the opposite of an IP, which is content-agnostic and inherently transient.
I bet he doesn't believe in Iraq WMD either. But on the point about delayed reporting: Aside from Dr. Wenliang's suspicions, even the whistleblowers weren't concerned until the first diagnosis of a cluster of abnormal flu pneumonias by Wuhan-based respiratory expert Zhang Jixian - December 26. First report by local doctors to Wuhan CDC - December 27. First report to WHO - December 31. WHO reported the information it had which initially was still inconclusive. So conspicuous China-bashing from US and UK, both of whom would love to have someone to blame for their own criminal negligence, is less than convincing.
In fact, I suspect it had to do with two moving targets: (1) after a year without budging, the longer she was incarcerated the less the argument about effective coercion was credible; and (2) the realisation that the longer she was incarcerated, the more she gained public respect and admiration. Even the imposition of a punitive fine brings the court into disrepute, a last pointless, vindictive nail the the state's coffin. The judge had to release her before she turned into Nelson Mandela or Rosa Parks.
Apparently unlikely to help Julian Assange then, since he's branded a foreign spy. Or indeed any other non-US journalist who can be conveniently excluded for the same reason?
"a Guardian report of a meeting with Manafort 2 years earlier that had just come to light must be fake, because London has lots of CCTV".
No, he didn't say that. His legal team said there was no trace of a Manafort meeting at the Ecuadorian embassy despite mandatory embassy sign-in, ID checks and 24/7 video surveillance of Assange (as it happens, by a Spanish company which is being prosecuted in Spain for privacy violations).
In our complicated Trumpian world these simple definitions could be useful:
Journalist: Someone who tells you what I want you to know.
Traitor: Someone who tells you what I don't want you to know.
Whistleblower: Someone who tells me what I want to know.
Liar: Someone who tells me what I don't want to know.
I have a depressing sense that Art 13 will pass. Not because it should, but because the technical calibre of MEPs is woeful. I've already had serious problems with content trolling on a charity site where conference presentations from industry experts going back 25 years were linked. Apparently some old PDF presentations contained licensed images. As webmaster I expect submissions to use licensed images, and these may have been since they came from UN agencies. But in any case the images were not identified in any way as proprietary. The solution is simple - the entire site is now private. The industry is deprived of useful research tools. With Art 13 and 11 I expect a very significant fraction of the WWW will vanish into 'gated communities'. Until sanity prevails, it's a massive Lose Lose.
The entire argument about author's revenue is total hokum. I don't buy books because of the cover art, I buy them because I'm familiar with the author. And the initial contact in the great majority of cases happens at the local library. I spend $hundreds/year on books in a variety of formats simply because I like the author based on a library loan.
I do not typically buy books in a state of ignorance - caveat emptor. It's not as if the author or vendor is prepared to guarantee my satisfaction.
Based on my experience, authors should be obliged to pay libraries for their very effective revenue-increasing free advertising. Or we can move to a no-quibble unlimited returns policy with the vendor paying return costs.
Just asking for a friend, but does this mean the motor vehicle licensing agency will in future be responsible for all traffic offences committed by cars it registers?
Not just depth of pocket - many sites are sponsored or affiliated to charities or other orgs which (correctly or not) feel they cannot run the risk of negative publicity from high profile litigation defence.
True that. But the notion that there is some haemorrhage of funds is laughable. I'm old enough to remember the Payola scandals when the same content providers bribed DJs to give their hits more free air time. Now, I've just had to permanently remove a public domain transport safety website because of copyright trolling. I despair. Legislators appear totally illiterate, regulators suborned, and courts dedicated to excessive enforcement of bad law. I hope someone wakes up before the entire WWW becomes the shopping channel.
So in Kansas, a man's home is his collander? I remember about 50 years ago being told by a well-meaning teacher that unlike the USSR's constitution which sounded wonderful but wasn't enforced, the US constitution actually meant something. One of the causes of the US Revolution was Writs of Assistance allowing warrantless search and seizure. By Kansas standards we seem to be well past that point.
A bit of context would help. This is a serious case of the pot calling the kettle black, almost as if we'd forgotten Ed Snowden's whistleblowing disclosures on the extent of Five Eyes spying - which got him unintended Russian residency as a reward. Whoever the Salisbury super-spy duo actually were, they were visibly stooges, not assassins. They make Wily Coyote look professional. Sergei Skripal might be able to ID them, but amazingly not only have all the witnesses vanished, but the press has displayed an astounding disinterest in finding them. Or examining the "official" UK narrative. As for the Dutch OPCW "hack" - is it really that surprising when the detailed chemical analysis of the alleged nerve agent remains secret? The OPCW protocols say that the findings should be available to all members, including Russia which, after all, had only been accused of using a prohibited weapon based on claims that it was a deadly poison manufactured in Russia - a manifest porky, since it wasn't Novichok and could have been manufactured anywhere. Complaining about Russians poking around the OPCW WiFi seem pretty feeble compared to the antics GCHQ and others get up to, including hacking friendly governments.
So great, now we know where to find the GRU's car park. With that kind of sleuthing, finding Sergei Skripal should be a snap.
We've had prosecutions this week for teaching a dog to do something offensive on a video and for downloading a book from the 70s which remains easily available. So a good week for the public, who are presumably catatonic with anxiety about someone reading Mein Kampf. I'm concerned that the unwary might be radicalised by reading something really dangerous, like Magna Carta.
I'm missing something. How can a snippet be a single word, since a single word cannot provide a unique source? If it is an unusual word like "benzophosphenolhydride" which is coincidentally the subject of a news story, how can I prohibit the use of this snippet on e.g. my company pharmaceutical innovations blog? Is this a literary snippet law or can I still point to stories using non-linguistic syntax (hex addressing)? The concept of protecting "small excerpts" of single word size must logically be extended to other publications and media. For example, will musical snippets of single note size be protected?
Re: Re: Dewey Decimal System
The hash ensures uniqueness, as does the analogous legacy library index. But the misfile is physical. If the hash-identified copy is no longer online, it's gone. So redundancy arises, and with it the need for oceanic tides of data synchronisation, which in turn demand rate-limiting data 'bulkheads'.
(untitled comment) (as flynginn)
Everything in the US seems to be a "war". The war on crime, the war on drugs, the war on terrorism, the war on child sex abuse. Each war provides an excuse based on overwhelming public interest to remove or weaken constitutional rights and protections. None of these wars will ever end, so the effect on rights is permanent. In all these wars the citizen is both victim and enemy. Did you smoke a joint in high school? Then of course you accept random stop and search and the seizure of assets for no particular reason. Did you ever shoplift? Then you know how important it is to throw people in prison for years for non-violent crimes. Did you ever read Playboy? Then you know how vital it is that law enforcement has total access to all your digital media at all times. Because anyone could be one. And no policing power is too extreme to deal with it. We certainly wouldn't want judges and lawyers and, well, law itself, getting in the way.
Because of the self-Streisanding all of this causes the alphabet agencies, it should be obvious that only exceptionally thick perverts would rely on commercial communication encryption. Why bother, when old-fashioned tradecraft is more secure. But that isn't the real aim anyway, is it? And the question remains; it's easy to start a war, but how do you stop it?
Re: Re:
The "normal charter" is the Basic Law. There is nothing in the Basic Law about HK being unable to apply "dictatorial" legislation which is precisely the legislation required of it by the Basic Law.
Your analogy has no visible bearing. If HK was "sold down the river" it was by the British government which agreed to the Basic Law. But perhaps you simply object to China reclaiming its own property from the colonial state which took it by force during the Opium Wars.
The US-funded colour revolution failed. Tough. Tell Joshua Wong to give the cash back to NED and the OTF if he hasn't spent it all on weapons and US flags.
Re: Re:
"Just how dumb and ignorant do you think we all are?"
I don't know how ignorant you "all" are. But some appear not to have read the Basic Law of HK.
(untitled comment)
Article 23 of the <u>Basic Law</u> governing the HK handover from UK to China states:
<i>The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall enact laws on its own to prohibit any act of treason, secession, sedition, subversion against the Central People's Government, or theft of state secrets, to prohibit foreign political organizations or bodies from conducting political activities in the Region, and to prohibit political organizations or bodies of the Region from establishing ties with foreign political organizations or bodies.</i>
When the HK SAR failed to do this, PRC enacted legislation to make up the deficiency in accordance with Article 18. Not only is this not "in violation" of the Basic Law, it is clearly anticipated by it.
Please do more research to avoid misleading or mendacious claims.
(untitled comment)
Ignoring the technical feasibility issues for a moment, this reminds me of the introduction of the Dewey Decimal system for library location. Instead of describing availability by location ("American Farm Tractor" by Randy Leffingwell is on floor 3, stack 14, shelf 2) it can be located by subject (631.3.x) anywhere that has a copy. The content with IPFS could be anything but there's always the risk that it will be misfiled. It seems to be the opposite of an IP, which is content-agnostic and inherently transient.
Re: Re: Credible?
I bet he doesn't believe in Iraq WMD either. But on the point about delayed reporting: Aside from Dr. Wenliang's suspicions, even the whistleblowers weren't concerned until the first diagnosis of a cluster of abnormal flu pneumonias by Wuhan-based respiratory expert Zhang Jixian - December 26. First report by local doctors to Wuhan CDC - December 27. First report to WHO - December 31. WHO reported the information it had which initially was still inconclusive. So conspicuous China-bashing from US and UK, both of whom would love to have someone to blame for their own criminal negligence, is less than convincing.
(untitled comment)
In fact, I suspect it had to do with two moving targets: (1) after a year without budging, the longer she was incarcerated the less the argument about effective coercion was credible; and (2) the realisation that the longer she was incarcerated, the more she gained public respect and admiration. Even the imposition of a punitive fine brings the court into disrepute, a last pointless, vindictive nail the the state's coffin. The judge had to release her before she turned into Nelson Mandela or Rosa Parks.
(untitled comment)
Apparently unlikely to help Julian Assange then, since he's branded a foreign spy. Or indeed any other non-US journalist who can be conveniently excluded for the same reason?
Re: K Tetch
"a Guardian report of a meeting with Manafort 2 years earlier that had just come to light must be fake, because London has lots of CCTV".
No, he didn't say that. His legal team said there was no trace of a Manafort meeting at the Ecuadorian embassy despite mandatory embassy sign-in, ID checks and 24/7 video surveillance of Assange (as it happens, by a Spanish company which is being prosecuted in Spain for privacy violations).
Your agenda is showing.
(untitled comment)
In our complicated Trumpian world these simple definitions could be useful:
Journalist: Someone who tells you what I want you to know.
Traitor: Someone who tells you what I don't want you to know.
Whistleblower: Someone who tells me what I want to know.
Liar: Someone who tells me what I don't want to know.
(untitled comment)
I have a depressing sense that Art 13 will pass. Not because it should, but because the technical calibre of MEPs is woeful. I've already had serious problems with content trolling on a charity site where conference presentations from industry experts going back 25 years were linked. Apparently some old PDF presentations contained licensed images. As webmaster I expect submissions to use licensed images, and these may have been since they came from UN agencies. But in any case the images were not identified in any way as proprietary. The solution is simple - the entire site is now private. The industry is deprived of useful research tools. With Art 13 and 11 I expect a very significant fraction of the WWW will vanish into 'gated communities'. Until sanity prevails, it's a massive Lose Lose.
Re: Let's be real
The entire argument about author's revenue is total hokum. I don't buy books because of the cover art, I buy them because I'm familiar with the author. And the initial contact in the great majority of cases happens at the local library. I spend $hundreds/year on books in a variety of formats simply because I like the author based on a library loan.
I do not typically buy books in a state of ignorance - caveat emptor. It's not as if the author or vendor is prepared to guarantee my satisfaction.
Based on my experience, authors should be obliged to pay libraries for their very effective revenue-increasing free advertising. Or we can move to a no-quibble unlimited returns policy with the vendor paying return costs.
(untitled comment)
Re:
Re:
(untitled comment)
(untitled comment)
So great, now we know where to find the GRU's car park. With that kind of sleuthing, finding Sergei Skripal should be a snap.
(untitled comment)
(untitled comment)
More comments from flyinginn >>
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by flyinginn.
Submit a story now.
Tools & Services
TwitterFacebook
RSS
Podcast
Research & Reports
Company
About UsAdvertising Policies
Privacy
Contact
Help & FeedbackMedia Kit
Sponsor/Advertise
Submit a Story
More
Copia InstituteInsider Shop
Support Techdirt