Posts by Tree & Tree = Dirty Tree 24 publicly visible posts • joined 24 Nov 2010
... no you don't.
Just back up your stuff, cancel your account and move to another platform. Nobody forces anyone to use Arsebook.
The positive side effect of opting out entirely would be:
1) it's the only way they get the message as they don't give a rats ass about what YOU want
2) it's the only measure you have as your participation is the only thing they care about
3) you might actually get a real life back
Why would those be different than any other advice on household safety? Ask yourself who has an interest in not educating, not warning, not discouraging people from owning guns, and what their motive is...
I would never consider raising my kids in a society where the open display of firearms in public is tolerated. 'nuff said.
To the author of the article: How many ballistic dick extensions do you keep at home? Feels good?
And yes, it is very much the duty of a responsible general physicist to take a holistic view on safety and health, not just apply bandages and subscribe pills.
1. Hackers have no scruples, moral values, are not human enough to have a sense of right or wrong.
2. Hackers have no agenda, no purpose in life and do all that hacking to give their sorry excuse for a life some kind on meaning.
3. Hackers are detached from reality, thinking in some secret programming language and unable to have real social contacts.
4 Hackers take pure pleasure in destroying stuff for no obvious reason.
Wake up, everyone!! Every social group has a statistic amount of idiots, and those are usually exploited to discredit the whole group. If "the authorities" would get their minds around the idea that above assumptions are plain wrong, give the more serious parts of hacker groups some credit for their expertize (and good intentions), and gained the trust of at least a few members the benefits would be mutual. But I am afraid there is too much pride to swallow on both sides, right?
It's easier to manipulate opinion in a direction where "hacker" equals "terrorist" similar as is done with the term "activist". "If you can't control it, destroy it..."; "If they talk back, destroy them..."
And in the other corner to brandish everything close to any government as evil and corrupted, and worth fighting no matter what.
When do you mentally mature enough to get over the state of a stubborn, over opinionated, rebellious teenager thrashed around by early puberty. Damn it! Both of you!
... as long as the right guys get a thrashing and not the first best in any way involved they get their hands on.
MS has a long way to go to earn credit as bonafide security player, but they IMHO are on a good track. Really hope they don't blow it.
Fighting cyber crime will get increasingly difficult if the biggest players are not pulling in the right direction.
... which will tell you only the bright side of things and lets you find out the flip sides by yourself.
And your approach is sooo 90ties ;-P
I at least use a device that does everything at once (called a smartphone), and use it a lot. In the EU operators have to cap roaming costs at 50€ and send you a warning when you reach the cap. Then you have to explicitly approve additional costs and be told what they are. So no surprises possible. Only for what comes after that I would in parts agree with you.
Can we get a "medieval tech" Icon?
Who is stupid enough to buy a game console and add his real personal data? What for?
I have two aliases I use for all purposes where my real personal data is irrelevant, say where no transfer of money or rights occurs.
And that is 99% of all cases!
As you cannot trust in most security implementations of online services "out there" that is the easiest and best possible damage control I can think of.
Go hack my account. That one? Not my account! :-P
If you really make yourself dependent in any ways of Arsebook you don't deserve better than to be screwed.
It's a nice extra to whatever you do, a little vanity you can grant yourself, but keep it on such a level that you
A) can perfectly fine live without it
B) nothing you publish couldn't be written on a billboard on your capitals main square
C) your backup plan ensures you reach everyone you have been in contact with via Arsebook to explain whats going on if someone does things in your name you wouldn't
Only then you will be save.
And same rules apply to all social media platforms and the internet per se!
"Arsebook" and "security" can only coexist in the same sentence in the immediate presence of a negation, or if meant as a joke....
(Same applies to "Internet" and "privacy"...)
You might want to think that everybody should have understood this much by now.
'nuff said.
What bugs me more than someone exploiting this fact is that there is no law that prevents this.
A salesman that enters my home uninvited or even puts a shoe in the door has broken a law and knows it.
If I buy a baby phone with video surveillance (yep, that exists really...) and the company selling it syphons of the whole video and audio feed, for quality insurance or whatever reason they claim, will be sued into oblivion.
If someone hides in a contract a clause that obliges the signer to things that have no relevance to the main contract the clause will be ruled invalid.
But your computer obviously is not considered "private space" per se. Nobody is willing to apply rules based on the same moral standards to your computer and the inherent "cyber property" than is applied to your other, "real world" property.
So installing spyware on my computer bundled with a totally unrelated, necessary tool or service and obscuring this fact enough that the intent to fool me is obvious, stealing data I never would give up voluntarily (else they would just ask!) and selling it to other businesses that use said data to harass me with unsolicited shite is obviously not a crime.
After all, If you are stupid enough to fall for it, nana nana na-na.
And right there's your solution. Educate your family and friends, spread the word. Its all you can do.
Until the old generation of "law makers" and "law keepers", for which simply using a computer is already a challenge and that simply won't learn enough to see the whole picture anymore, has stepped down this will not change. Give it 15 years or so until most of them are replaced with a generation that has never seen a world without computers (and can't even imagine it), and things will be different.
... just not sure exactly HOW different.
... if its purpose is to disrupt vital infrastructure.
Blowing up a bridge is a terrorist act even if nobody get physically hurt, sabotaging power lines is a terrorist act, disrupting the water supply, or jamming purposefully a significant portion of the mobile network.
I do agree that governments tend to abuse the term "terrorism" as well as the fear from it to support parts of their agenda that otherwise don't go down well with the public.
I also agree that the most obvious abuse is to call any kind of anti government protest "terrorism", and that extend to aggressive or disruptive actions, although I do despise violent protest. Chaining yourself to a train to prevent it from departing is NOT a terrorist act, throwing stones at police officers, albeit not justifiable, neither.
The line between "protest with violent tendencies" are blurry and defined by common sense at best- but one truth is undeniable: Violence is not equal to bloodshed!
And BTW, hacking is as much a peaceful act as smashing a phone booth window, jacking a car or pouring poison into your neighbors fish pond...
Unless it happens as preventive security measure with the consent of the attacked,
its vandalism at best, usually simply a crime, and can be terrorism at worst.
... is that the whistle blower following his conscious and acting in the name of truth, justice and the rules of the Geneva Convention is charged totally out of proportion like a high profile criminal, next to mobsters and mass murderers, while the actual crimes he uncovered go without consequences.
And that the international community is not crying 'foul' over it, the whole issue has become "old news", something for which to watch from a distance how it might play out.
And what the hell is an "Ex-Hacker"? Did he get charged, served a sentence and repented for his crimes to deserve the "ex-" suffix?
But the message to the public this case sends is loud and clear: you cross us and we turn your life into a living hell, you work with us and everything can be forgiven (accept if you crossed us before).
Wheres a "Hitler" or "Stalin" icon when you need one...
Yes, we absolutely do!
But we cannot underestimate the importance or exaggerate the execution of the "ethical" bit.
That is exactly where that %//(&&§ failed. There is no way you access someone's protected or assumed private data, also not for demonstration purposes, without this persons explicit consent.
Period.
This guy was driven by petty personal motives (Pictures of rival's wife, remember?), so his integrity seems to leave wanting. Which should exclude him from staring in any convention and rids him of every claim for respect.
Mediocre movie, still fun. Anyways, remember the ending? The whole world without technology, no electricity, no engines.
Just ask yourself if we would be able to survive in such a scenario. Then look at us now, measure the gap, and use that as measure to put things into proportion.
There is always a way, and it is on neither side of the extremes. Moderation and balance are the natural state of everything, and every exception is just a step towards it.
Any cent paid for scientific, peaceful research, no mater how "useless" it might seem at the time, is 100 times better than a cent paid for military equipment, even military inspired technology research.
And the budget spend WORLDWIDE for all scientific research on all levels together, including big installation like the LHC, are a fraction of what the largest nations spend in military budget EACH.
When single persons have the power direct such large sums of money according to their personal preferences and believe regardless the wider impact on the common good you KNOW something stinks in the land on Denmark.
Then again, every nation has a government no better than they deserve... :-P
---
And yes, there is a lot of tax money wasted everywhere for entertainment of the "panem et circensis" variety, for which we pay another premium in healthcare costs (apart from common believe watching sports has NO positive effect on your physiology- and the protagonists' achievements are NOT yours!).
... but my wife does.
Personally I am not willing to drop my pants in front of the whole internet community. Especially not as long as I don't trust Arsebook's security policy. That company is totally incompetent to develop decent code, and I don't trust it's integrity either.
Your privacy against a good standing with the authorities? Take a guess.
But that's just little tinfoil hatter me. There is basically nothing wrong with sharing your whole life on the internet- as long as you censor it a bit ;-) Everyone has full control over what they share and what not, and if you think that your life is really that interesting to the rest of the world, be my guest. What people fail to see is that there is:
NO SUCH THING AS PRIVACY ON THE INTERNET
Never was, never will be! Once you have understood this, go ahead and share whatever you like!
I am aware that there is a wealth of information about me all over the internet, indirectly through my wife's Facebook account, in this forum, and in many other places. Its inevitable if you work in IT and have public appearances over many years.
If "the powers that be" want to frame you on something they will succeed anyways. If a government goes rogue your Facebook account is your least concern.
This whole paranoia thing is like jealousy in marriage. As long as there is no reason the whole thing is ridiculous, immature and unfair to the other side. If there is a reason its too late to worry, and its time to take consequences. But apart from staying decent and not causing a situation yourself there is very little you can do to avoid it. You will have to cross that bridge once you reach it, so you might as well ditch irrational paranoia and just live your life.
P.S: This is not an appeal to neglect ones social and political responsibilities! But in my experience the biggest conspiracy theorists and other paranoia addicts are the least active where it matters and don't even try to make a constructive change to anything.
that holds a good amount of truth also about the standard education and attitude of your average US Joe, plus:
- the world is ~7000 years old, that is when God created it according to the Bible
- all humans are descendants of Adam and Eve
- if you are not with Jesus you will be damned for eternity when the world ends
- all Muslims are evil killers because their religion demands it
- all Asians are little, peculiar, and look the same
- everyone is born with the same chances, everywhere
- being gay is a choice and is immoral
(others think its a mental disease)
- outside of the united states is "the frontier", everywhere
- if you want something and the owner is not giving it to you he is your enemy and has to be forced to it
(its called "defending national interests")
- all your enemies deserve to be fought into submission, always
- Europe is a country
- so is Asia
- and Africa
... the list goes on endlessly.
And I am sure everyone can come up with a similar list about just anyone.
... looking for the one with the library card in the pocket.
1st - You can post almost anything you want on Twitter (with rare exceptions). Its called freedom of speech.
2nd - Not agreeing with a government, even attacking your government openly for perceived misconduct, is not a crime if you don't break a law doing so- unless you live in a fascist or otherwise totalitarian country. It's called executing your democratic rights, and responsible journalism.
3rd - Anything you say on twitter is public. Anyone who followed that person from the start does have that information already (or don't they?). In fact, anything you say or do on the internet is as public as doing in the middle of Trafalgar square.
4th - Governments do have certain rights and possibilities if they are manifested in that countries law. The question is with which intention it does make use of them- and if the populace has a chance to change those rights if there is a majority for it. It doesn't get more democratic than that.
So the problem is not the government getting information illegally. It is totally legal for the government to obtain this information.
It is also not the possibility that it may find something incriminating as that person has the right to say whatever she wants. And even to do, again as long as she doesn't break any law in the country she moves about.
The problem is a government intimidating and bullying "annoying" people by raiding their homes and confiscating their property (journalists computers seized), harassing them with prolonged and exaggerated use of administrative procedures (security consultants detained, searched and questioned at airports), and sending them 'messages' by intruding into peoples privacy just to show they can (this case).
The message between the lines is: we have the power, you have no chance against us.We know who you are, what you do and where to find you. You better be careful what you do and say, or else...
It's sad, and frankly frightening, to see just how far things have gone in the country that claims to be worlds safe guardian for freedom and democracy.
... they first have to get get rid of their biggest liability: Assange himself.
The guy is he best thing that could happen to Wikileaks enemies. He has all of the telltale signs of a psychopath, and his narcissism and greed have the potential to destroy Wikileaks.
The ignorance and arrogance of his "I am Wikileaks" attitude! Wikileaks is an idea, born from some of the most democratic ideas there are:
that a government has no right to have secrets from its people
has no right to act against its peoples will,
and can only survive if the leading parties are in constructive competition with a healthy and respected opposition.
Wikileaks is a safeguard of democracy, not it's enemy. That is why it is so important and has to survive.
Assange, on the other hand, would have left Wikileaks in reaction to the scandals around his person long ago if he really would believe in the ideals of Wikileaks and not only his own benefit. Even most politicians show more decency and guts than this guy...
Joke Alert misplaced.
This is how it was in my childhood. My banger, bought with my money -my parents made sure I spend a minimum amount of free time and the occasional week or two during holidays earning it myself with carrying newspapers or taking summer jobs. My responsibility - didn't have to ask if I can paint it, strip pit or burn it (although I never would have). And yes, it didn't have the power to speed much, but it was MINE! :-D
And that is exactly how i will handle I when my youngsters grow to that age. I _maybe_ might sponsor their first banger a bit if I see they make an honest effort, but if I can't trust them by then to be responsible enough not to hurt themselves and others, plus won't have the cool to turn half a blind eye to that little craziness we all were entitled to at that age...
... I will have to admit to have utterly failed as a parent and return my parenting permit.
No extra child restraining technology should be needed here for anyone, really, if they did their job.
It's not that security researchers haven't been physically attacked by mobsters for impairing their "business" (like banking trojans etc), or the data centers of ISPs burned down for refusing to host their "services".
Don't be mistaken, we are talking serious bad asses here...
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
