Post #48,836
8/9/02 1:56:51 PM
|
The Reg wants Europe to take back the Web
Damn the Constitution: Europe must take back the Web [link|http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/26612.html|Right here]
Interesting, to say the least. And I don't see much to disagree with...
|
Post #48,838
8/9/02 2:15:32 PM
8/9/02 2:19:30 PM
|
He's just itching for a fight
This would not stop the US treating its Constitution as the only true source of wisdom or framing their discussions in terms that draw only from the US political and economic tradition. But if they decide to run their part of the Net according to the principles laid down two hundred and fifty years ago by a bunch of renegade merchants and rebellious slave owners they would not be able to force the rest of us to follow suit. And as soon as he demonstrates another system that has worked nearly as well, nearly as long, then he can argue that it's writers' business activities or slaveholding contributed to its failings. He doesn't help his argument with blatant trolling like that. === Part 2: An important factor in Europe's favour is that we retain a belief that governments are a good thing, that political control is both necessary and desirable, and that laws serve the people. These beliefs are now lacking in the United States, rendering it incapable of acting to create any sort of civic space online or allowing its government to intervene effectively to regulate the Net. [Emphasis added] What does he mean "now lacking"? Lack of belief in the necessity of government control is only the foundation of the country! This guy doesn't realize how out of touch he is with the U.S. ===
Microsoft offers them the one thing most business people will pay any price for - the ability to say "we had no choice - everyone's doing it that way." -- [link|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=38978|Andrew Grygus]
Edited by drewk
Aug. 9, 2002, 02:19:30 PM EDT
|
Post #48,846
8/9/02 4:03:16 PM
|
By what criteria?
And as soon as he demonstrates another system that has worked nearly as well, nearly as long, then he can argue that it's writers' business activities or slaveholding contributed to its failings. He doesn't help his argument with blatant trolling like that.
"...worked nearly as well" What satisfies that condition? Longevity? see below.
"...nearly as long" Roman Empire. Persian. Egyptian. Chinese, etc. etc. Take your pick. (if "longer" satisfies the condition)
Re-elect Gore in 2004
|
Post #48,855
8/9/02 5:19:45 PM
|
The ones they used ;)
Seriously, though, I make a distinction between the goal of those who wrote the constitution and the specific methods they articulated. The goal was to safeguard the rights of the goverened against the power of the government. Everything they specified was an attempt to achieve that goal. Representative democracy (OK, a republic) was simply the best moethod they could imagine for achieving the goal.
I happen to share that goal. So any actual or possible political system has to be judged in terms of how well it protects the rights of the governed. Does the current system sometimes err on the side of allowing people to do things that may not be in the public interest? Absolutely. Does this allow some individuals to intentinally "work" the system to their own ends? Sure. But every attempt to restrict potential abuses gives more actual power to the government. Power they show a decided reluctance to give back. All things considered, I'd prefer to continue erring on the side of individual freedoms than government controls.
===
Microsoft offers them the one thing most business people will pay any price for - the ability to say "we had no choice - everyone's doing it that way." -- [link|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=38978|Andrew Grygus]
|
Post #48,894
8/9/02 10:15:44 PM
|
I'm going to play D. A.
Let me first simplify. You are saying that the goal of our founders was to protect those without power from the powerfull.
I present this science fiction response-
SETI bears fruit. The news is not good. The only extraterristral race ever discovered is found to be xenophobic beyond even our standards. We can expect an attack at any time.
Should we allow the luxury of personal freedoms if they conflict with the defense effort? Do we continue the support of nonproductive citizens? (This would have to include the retired.) Does the separation of church and state really matter?
Wouldn't a fascist type government be more suited to dealing with this?
If you agree, then the best government is obviously the one that best deals with outside threats to it's people, not the one that coddles it's citizens.
Re-elect Gore in 2004
|
Post #48,913
8/10/02 3:50:01 AM
|
Turn it around.
Not knowing what SETI might find (as - today)
Best government would be that which fosters a social behaviour such that - were we to encounter actually civilized life, for the first time anywhere:
Our behaviour would not tend to aggravate THEM into dealing with US (the way we currently deal with each other, always after.. we invent 'differences' to rationalize our next bestial actions).
Simple(r) ?
:-\ufffd
|
Post #48,994
8/11/02 1:56:05 PM
|
"Coddles"?
Hmmm.
People who say "it's better to think about security and stability than comfort" really mean "better to think about MY security and MY stability than YOUR comfort."
"We are all born originals -- why is it so many of us die copies?"
- Edward Young
|
Post #48,861
8/9/02 6:12:58 PM
|
System working?
I had dinner with a new friend recently - he's English with a French family. Lives in Paris, speaks at least 3 languages fluently and works in cross culture trademark licensing.
His take on the collapse of the dot coms and subsequent revelations of cooked books in our investment system is that it will have hugely negative world wide impact. From the rest of the world's perspective, the US has long been a role model for the way things ought to be done. Only the US has recently blown its credibility. Now the foreigners are saying "but see - they have to cheat too".
Previously we were the example that playing fair was the way to win big. We've lost our credibility as leaders and that's going to be very hard to win back.
I am out of the country for the duration of the Bush administration.
Please leave a message and I'll get back to you when democracy returns.
|
Post #48,895
8/9/02 10:21:16 PM
|
Can I quote you?
A succinct description of foriegn attitudes. I'd like to submit your comment to Mediawhoresonline.com, they could post it in a larger community.
Re-elect Gore in 2004
|
Post #48,921
8/10/02 10:52:50 AM
|
Sure
Whatever you like.
I hadn't realized that the US was such a role model for the rest of the world.
It was sort of an A-ha moment for me.
I am out of the country for the duration of the Bush administration.
Please leave a message and I'll get back to you when democracy returns.
|
Post #48,889
8/9/02 9:10:06 PM
|
Belief that governments are a good thing?
Some of us libertarian-leaning conservatives view government control as a quite major source of many ills in U.S. society. The DMCA, for instance - government control at its worst.
The lawyers would mostly rather be what they are than get out of the way even if the cost was Hammerfall. - Jerry Pournelle
|
Post #48,839
8/9/02 2:20:34 PM
|
Why does he hate America so much?
If the price of being online is to swallow US values, then many may think twice about using the Net at all, and if the only game online follows US rules, then many may decide not to play. :) We have already seen US law, in the form of Digital Millennium Copyright Act, used to persuade hosts in other countries to pull material or limit its availability. Ah, that's one reason. Congressman Howard Berman's ridiculous proposal to give copyright holders immunity from prosecution if they hack into P2P networks is the latest attempt by the US Congress to pass laws that will directly affect every Internet user, because no US court would allow prosecution of a company in another jurisdiction when immunity is granted by US law. Ah, another reason. While this would greatly please the US, it would not be in the interests of the majority of Internet users, who want a network that allows them to express their own values, respects their own laws and supports their own cultures and interests. Good luck.
|
Post #48,858
8/9/02 5:45:23 PM
|
Fine then, go form EuropeNet and see how you like it.
Cut off the Internet, form your own little Intranet and name it EuropeNet. What is stopping them from doing this? All they need is a Firewall that blocks US IP addresses? Of course that won't stop us from nicknaming it FacistNet or some other silly name. :)
Taking control of the Internet, or shutting off the rest of the world, kind of defeats the purpose of a Global Network, don't it?
Anyway, we should form a group like the UN, that can pass Internet Laws that everyone has to follow. Each country will have their own representatives on that group to help decide the laws of the net. Each country will have their own Super Firewall to block out websites that do no follow their local laws. Rename the Internet to the Censornet, make an Adult version of NetNanny for Grownups to block unlawful sites.
[link|http://games.speakeasy.net/data/files/khan.jpg|"Khan!!!" -Kirk]
|
Post #48,882
8/9/02 8:27:06 PM
|
Hyppocrits! EUCD!
[link|http://www.patent.gov.uk/about/consultations/eccopyright/index.htm|[link|http://www.patent.gov.uk/about/consultations/eccopyright/index.htm|http://www.patent.g...ht/index.htm]]
The UK is making their own version of the DMCA, named the EUCD. Same media companies pulling the strings of a different set of puppets in a different government.
This is not new, it has already been Slashdotted:
[link|http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/27/2326226&tid=153|[link|http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/27/2326226|http://yro.slashdot...0/27/2326226]&tid=153]
Info from the NTK:
[link|http://www.ntk.net/2002/08/09/|[link|http://www.ntk.net/2002/08/09/|http://www.ntk.net/2002/08/09/]]
[link|http://games.speakeasy.net/data/files/khan.jpg|"Khan!!!" -Kirk]
|
Post #48,933
8/10/02 2:15:09 PM
|
Sense and Nonsense
Article made some good points which others have pointed out and had a lot of nonsense as well
Either the net is global or it's not
this has to be decided
it is silly to complain about civil rights in the US without comparing them to the state of same in say France (a country that wants to police the entire net)
I hope the pols here or elsewhere (Italy has discussed this too) do not let companies 'hack' for their 'rights'
SF is full of examples of what happens when 'info wars' are allowed to happen
A
Play I Some Music w/ Papa Andy
Saturday 8 PM - 11 PM ET
All Night Rewind 11 PM - 5 PM
Reggae, African and Caribbean Music
[link|http://wxxe.org|Tune In]
|
Post #48,997
8/11/02 2:03:17 PM
|
The man is a bona-fide idiot
Not that I disagree with all of his complaints, but when you sum up the totality of his argument you find that he's more interested in separating the European net from the American net than he is in correcting any of them.
One the one hand, he's pissed that the US is using the DMCA to force other countries to comply with out idiotic patent laws, etc. Well, good, so am I. I think it's moronic.
On the OTHER hand, he's pissed that Yahoo will not censor servers SITTING IN THE US just because Germany has a law that prohibits the sale of Nazi propaganda, and a German court told them to.
FOR GOD'S SAKE... WHICH IS IT???
If the US shouldn't go around telling other countries to enforce their laws, then GERMANY SHOULDN'T EITHER. But I suppose, because Yahoo, is an AMERICAN country, and ALL AMERICANS ARE EVIL, STUPID, AND MORE EVIL AND MORE STUPID THAN THAT, it's ok for Germany to tell us what to do.
CHRIST ON A CRUTCH, I HATE PSEUDO-INTELLECTUAL TRIPE.
"We are all born originals -- why is it so many of us die copies?"
- Edward Young
|
Post #49,003
8/11/02 4:01:37 PM
|
There's only one solution for escaping massive inconsistency
- leave the 'world of duality / duelling opposites / digital-think'.
OK.. so suicide is so.. so.. ... egotisitically jejeune, ineffective and: you don't get to see how today's soap opera played out: tomorrow.
Escape is possible though, but only internally - but then, that's where everything you think you know about: IS. No? ;-)
|
Post #49,015
8/11/02 6:07:27 PM
|
Actually, that case was with France, not Germany. HTH.
|
Post #49,018
8/11/02 7:05:37 PM
|
Oh, that's right... well...
I'm not quite ready to retract his "bona-fide idiot" status. What was the deal with Yahoo! and Germany? Any links?
(goes to sift through Google)
"We are all born originals -- why is it so many of us die copies?"
- Edward Young
|
Post #49,019
8/11/02 7:12:01 PM
|
The verdict in: Still an idiot, bona-fide
Ok, I remember the germany thing now. Germany saw some web pages that detailed how to disrupt railway services by damaging rail tracks. The pages were posted by some kind of radical environmentalist group, and they had a Yahoo! personal web page account.
Germany sued Yahoo! for hosting illegal content. Here's the good part: they sued Yahoo!'s German subsidiary, because they didn't think they could win in US Courts.
Why is that the good part? Because that's one of the big ugly clauses in the DMCA that THE FUCKING MORON WAS GRIPING ABOUT EARLIER IN HIS ARTICLE. The DMCA allows a company to litigate in their "home state" (which presumably has passed the DMCA) instead of in the state where the offense occurred (which is what usually happens).
I think I'm going to do a "Both Barrels" on this lovely piece of work.
"We are all born originals -- why is it so many of us die copies?"
- Edward Young
|
Post #49,020
8/11/02 7:13:45 PM
|
Aw, wait a minute...
I think that's the UCITA, not the DMCA.
Too... many... acronyms...
GAH!
Well, ok, I'm willing to drop the bona-fide. He's still an idiot.
"We are all born originals -- why is it so many of us die copies?"
- Edward Young
|
Post #49,021
8/11/02 7:30:41 PM
|
Well the Germans want to censor porn from other places
IIRC it was the Bavarian region government, but I'm too busy (or lazy) to look it up. So maybe you can put the bona-fide back in.
IMNSHO, he's either a total idiot or a troll, and in either case he's not worth responding, either on The Reg or here.
Tony
Who notes that there are plenty of things that could be better in every single country in the world
|
Post #49,354
8/14/02 1:36:58 PM
|
Excellent!
-- William Shatner's Trousers --
|
Post #49,066
8/12/02 11:27:12 AM
8/12/02 11:59:21 AM
|
I read his screed...
...and if I were to sum it up in so-many-words-or-less, It would tend to come out:
Neo-Fascist.
Who's this guy crappin'? Against all his railings about "respecting the morals, laws, blah blah blah" of individual countries, I hear: "We're the Guv'mint, dammit! We (and we alone) know hwat's good for you!"
NO thank you! I'm not quite ready for Big Brother. (And neither are those Chinese dissidents who made such a fuss in Tiennamen [sic] Square, either, for example....)
jb4
"About the use of language: it is impossible to sharpen a pencil with a blunt axe. It is equally vain to try to do it with ten blunt axes instead. "
-- Edsger W. Dijkstra (1930 - 2002)
(I wish more managers knew that...)
Edited by jb4
Aug. 12, 2002, 11:59:21 AM EDT
|
Post #49,167
8/13/02 6:43:22 AM
|
The article that he needs to read
[link|http://www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue6_2/odlyzko/|Content is Not King]
He is welcome to try and set up his separate but regulated Internet. He can add hooks for online equivalents of customs and immigration. Regulate away.
But good luck getting anyone to use it for basic reasons of network economics. Adding what he wants gets in the way of maximum connectivity, and connectivity wins.
Cheers,
Ben
Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes.
-- Edsger Wybe Dijkstra (1930-2002)
|
Post #49,495
8/15/02 3:27:34 PM
|
Author responds
[link|http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/26695.html|He responds to criticism]
Regards,
-scott anderson
"Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
|
Post #49,566
8/16/02 10:33:04 AM
|
Stunningly naive
Q: But equally there's a European tradition of civil disobedience - people simply ignore laws they don't like.
So how do you see a European subnet arising? Technically, and politically?
A: That's cool, though: I think the other side of my argument is that once you have a trusted, zoned network we'll all start undermining and subverting it. But in a European way! Great. A recommendation to just go ahead and implement a flawed law, planning to simply ignore it later. Q: So how will your "People's TCPA" work? I presume there'll be a UID in every component, and PCs will no longer be upgradeable?
A: I don't know how it will work, I just want us to start thinking about it now before it's too late. I can't see why it should get in the way of upgradeability. The point is not to tie everyone into a Microsoft-sponsored licensing scheme but to provide a trusted computer that can be a full participant in the network - swapping graphics cards or disk controllers doesn't have to impact that. In fact, the sort of 'lock-down' we see in Windows licensing is there because you don't have any hardware-level authentication at the processor level. Once your processor(s) are able to do that then they can certify any new hardware - basically just confirm that the new hardware is also authenticated for use in the trusted network. Translation: "I don't know how it will work. Here's how it will work." And does he really think the reason Windows barfs when you change hardware is that Microsoft is trying to ensure you aren't running "unsafe" components? It's is entirely about trying to make dure you aren't running one copy of their software on two machines. This would be completely unaffected by any system that simply verified that components were "trusted." ===
Microsoft offers them the one thing most business people will pay any price for - the ability to say "we had no choice - everyone's doing it that way." -- [link|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=38978|Andrew Grygus]
|
Post #49,626
8/16/02 6:24:54 PM
|
My comment remains the same
Plus to that I will add that Microsoft will gladly promise him all of that, but it won't actually work.
I would also suggest that he look up the history of network protocols. There was a government mandated protocol that did some of what he wanted. It died because nobody used it.
Seriously, what is the value proposition of being an early adopter? If you cannot sort that out, then you won't ever have early adopters, and your dreams become a chicken and egg thing - with you on the losing end.
Cheers,
Ben
PS Of course there is no need to bother convincing him of that. Let him waste his time on this, rather than on something that might have more of a chance of succeeding in pushing Big Brother.
Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes.
-- Edsger Wybe Dijkstra (1930-2002)
|
Post #49,520
8/15/02 6:19:23 PM
|
An easy way to settle the problem
[link|http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2002/8/14/191820/137|Vote me in for King of the Internet] and I shall form a committy to decide on International copyright laws, etc. ;)
[link|http://games.speakeasy.net/data/files/khan.jpg|"Khan!!!" -Kirk]
|
