On Mon, 2013-06-17 at 09:19 -0600, Steve Smith wrote:
Technology encourages the concentration of control in the same way that
it encourages the concentration of wealth.
I agree that this *can* happen and often *does* happen. I'd be
interested in a broader discussion of the mechanisms.
I'd be impressed if they managed this. From what I've seen, once a
project loses funding, it atrophies and is either cannibalized for
funded projects or dies (slowly). But I could see that as long as the
black budget stays black and if it grows, then a project could receive a
minimum of
On 6/18/13 6:18 AM, glen wrote:
I'd be impressed if they managed this. From what I've seen, once a
project loses funding, it atrophies and is either cannibalized for
funded projects or dies (slowly).
Building a hammer could be decoupled from using a hammer. The
contractor could be motivated
On 6/18/13 6:12 AM, glen wrote:
The mere concept that Google, Apple, or Microsoft might be _defending_
us vassals from the government by publishing the government requests
for data is laughable ... to me.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/17/edward-snowden-nsa-files-whistleblower
They
On Tue, 2013-06-18 at 06:53 -0600, Marcus G. Daniels wrote:
Building a hammer could be decoupled from using a hammer. [...]
In terms of enduring companies that misuse hammers, I'm thinking
Blackwater.
In the abstract, I agree. But in the concrete, these systems (mostly
computer-based
On Tue, 2013-06-18 at 07:37 -0600, Marcus G. Daniels wrote:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/17/edward-snowden-nsa-files-whistleblower
They are legally compelled to comply and maintain their silence in
regard to specifics of the program, but that does not comply them from
ethical
Very nice screed, indeed. And I'll infer the questions are rhetorical
and, then, infer the rhetoric. You're saying that we've based our
identity on contrasts with this monster and have been fighting this same
monster, perhaps in slightly different guises, for decades. But, for
some reason, now,
On 6/18/13 7:51 AM, glen wrote:
But in the concrete, these systems (mostly computer-based systems, but
including meat-space social networks) require continual energy input.
Their half-life is much much shorter than that of a hammer.
Probably because `nail gun' is in development at the same time
Glen -
Technology encourages the concentration of control in the same way that
it encourages the concentration of wealth.
I agree that this *can* happen and often *does* happen. I'd be
interested in a broader discussion of the mechanisms. The simple
answers seem obvious to me, but I suspect
I'm starting to think the Root Cause is simply ignorance. I don't mean
that to be as harsh as it sounds. It's simply that not only the core tech
changes rapidly, but now the whole web-app ecology has caught people by
surprise.
I know this via two recent family events.
One was that we found a
A big problem with teaching internet literacy is that it would amount to
teaching moving target: change is so hard to teach, since it keeps changing :-)
On a tangential note, I'm trying to come out of retirement (sabbatical :-)
after about five years, and whoa, it's incredible how much has
The ARRL http://www.arrl.org/ licenses amateur radio operators. They are
non-governmental but I think the FCC has to OK the levels of the
examination.
-- Owen
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Marcus G. Daniels mar...@snoutfarm.comwrote:
On 6/18/13 10:48 AM, Owen Densmore wrote:
Then
On 6/18/13 10:48 AM, Owen Densmore wrote:
Then the shock when you had both a desktop and a laptop and the email
got split between the two until you grok'd IMAP and/or gmail/yahoo/ms
.. all of whom took care of you but to whom you gave huge access to
your information?
[..]
The fact is that we
On 6/18/13 11:07 AM, Owen Densmore wrote:
The ARRL http://www.arrl.org/ licenses amateur radio operators. They
are non-governmental but I think the FCC has to OK the levels of the
examination.
Let's say that the PRISM accusations are true, and that Microsoft was
first on board providing
Maybe the problem is that the amount of pertinent technical knowledge is
growing, like the amount of scientific knowledge, and it exceeds any one
person's or any one organization's grasp. Not to mention all the
obsolescent knowledge. You talk as if there were someone, somewhere, who
has an
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 11:50 AM, Marcus G. Daniels mar...@snoutfarm.comwrote:
I get the impression that many people accept the story that the policies
and laws are what matter and not the deployed capabilities. It's a
remarkable mistake.
The code is the law, look at what the code does,
As the owner (and author) of an on-line store, I have a few comments:
On Jun 18, 2013, at 11:26 AM, Owen Densmore o...@backspaces.net wrote:
Why do I need a login to buy stuff for example? Yeah, I'd have to retype my
address .. which the browsers seem willing to do for me. They also
JavaScript is sorta lisp with braces. Seriously, Brendan Eich the JS
creator, had 2 weeks to build the scripting language for Netscape in the
early '90s. So he came up with a version of Scheme.
The bosses all said yuk, we want a real language, you know like C and
Java! .. go fetch another rock.
And then from May 15 Google's added PHP runtime to their App Engine:
http://venturebeat.com/2013/05/15/google-opens-up-powerful-aws-competitor-compute-engine-to-all/
How horrifying is that?
Robert C
On 6/18/13 2:52 PM, Gary Schiltz wrote:
It does seem that the internet ecosystem is settling
On 6/18/13 12:09 PM, Roger Critchlow wrote:
You talk as if there were someone, somewhere, who has an adequate
grasp of all the details.
Exactly. Individuals and all kinds of organizations have come to expect
promiscuity without consequence when it comes to the use of software.
As more and
On Fri, 2013-06-14 at 12:30 -0400, mar...@snoutfarm.com wrote:
Keep in mind that it (e.g. SCI) necessarily leads to distributed control
mechanisms. So it's not a simple distinction between citizens opting for
strong/big vs. weak/small government.
Technology encourages the concentration of
On 6/17/13 6:24 AM, glen wrote:
Technology encourages the concentration of control in the same way that
it encourages the concentration of wealth.
In other words, if people want their privacy, then they need to work
to ensure it. If we don't see them work to ensure it, then we can
conclude
Glen and Marcus -
Technology encourages the concentration of control in the same way that
it encourages the concentration of wealth.
I agree that this *can* happen and often *does* happen. I'd be
interested in a broader discussion of the mechanisms. The simple
answers seem obvious to me,
Steve wrote:
``Or they have allowed themselves to be convinced that A) the threats from
terrorism, etc are greater than the threats from loss of privacy; or B)
that their privacy is already lost, they might as well have
security.A slippery slope to be sure.''
Going back to the government
On Thu, 2013-06-13 at 09:37 +0200, Jochen Fromm wrote:
Is the problem of surveillance to find the right tradeoff between
privacy and security, as president Obama says? What do you think?
No. That's a false dichotomy. I think what's really happening is the
ongoing negotiation between
Glen,
Your arguments are very considered, deliberate - even careful - and
polite. However, let me pile on with this screed:
I thought that the kind of general governmental overreach that we are
talking about here was the reason we took on the USSR as an enemy during
the 1950s+ (not to
Is the problem of surveillance to find the right tradeoff between privacy and
security, as president Obama says? What do you think?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nhf-noHT6Gkfeature=youtube_gdata_player
-Jochen
Sent from Android
27 matches
Mail list logo
