Subscribe to this blog in Radio:
Didn't find what you were looking for?
E-mail this blog's author, Bruce Umbaugh:  |
|
 |
Friday, April 15, 2005 |
Video of copyright debate of the century
Last night, the copyright debate of the young century was held when EFF Senior IP Attorney Fred von Lohmann and Siva Vaidhyanathan, author of the great copyfight book "The Anarchist in the Library," faced down reps from the RIAA, MPAA, Universal and Napster in a 3+ hour wrangle before an audience at Cornell University. Now the video is online -- well, it's available as a crappy, dropout-prone Real stream. No doubt there will shortly be ripped audio and video available. Real Video Link (via Copyfight)
[bOing bOing]
Indeed:
When Are You Going to Sue the President? (Donna Wentworth).
That's what Siva Vaidhyanathan promised he'd ask RIAA President Cary Sherman at "The Download Debate Strikes Back," a Cornell University debate that due to sheer enthusiasm clocked in at nearly 3 1/2 hours. Did our fearless leader follow through? Find out by watching the freshly posted video here.
[Copyfight]
10:44:38 PM 
|
|
Culture of Life.
via Context:
WASHINGTON, April 15, 2006 -- President George W. Bush signed legislation today banning all federal funding for flu research, citing the "rampant use of unsound science" in current work on infectious diseases.
"Our investigations have shown that present research methods dealing with the causes and treatment of influenza are actually based on the theory of evolution -- how the virus supposedly mutates and evolves into new, more virulent forms," Bush said. "But as we all know, the jury is still out on this evolution thing. We cannot, we must not and we will not trust the precious health of our good citizens to an unproven theory. The American people deserve better than that."
The ban is immediate, wiping out approximately $3 billion in flu funding to clinics, laboratories, universities and all federal research institutions. Bush said this "swift, pre-emptive action" is necessary to confront the growing menace of the bird flu epidemic that began its inexorable spread from Southeast Asia in late 2005 and has now claimed more than 5 million lives. The worldwide death toll could reach as high as 100 million or more if a vaccine is not found, experts say.
[The Politburo Diktat]
10:40:55 PM
|
|
Get Your Game Off. Jenna Jameson's new game lets you simulate a porn photo shoot, direct adult talent in sex scenes and use virtual dildos on naked girls. But that's only the beginning. Commentary by Regina Lynn. [Wired News]
10:32:28 PM
|
|
Countering Wal-Mart's PR Campaign.
AP: Wal-Mart Fights Criticism From Labor. Wal-Mart is "good for America" and the barrage of criticism against the company is an effort to protect the status quo in retailing, President and CEO Lee Scott said Tuesday in a sharp attack on organized labor and retail rivals.
It's not just labor that finds Wal-Mart such a drain on this nation, and it's not just retail rivals. It's Wal-Mart's way of doing business, which has its positive side but in the end harms this nation far more than it helps. The giant company is too difficult for one newspaper to cover properly. In an era of multinational corporate giants, we will need to see group journalism -- and big groups at that -- tackle how such companies exist and operate around the globe. Inevitably, some of the journalism will be done by partisans. Maybe most will be. Yet except for the occasional massive series by a big newspaper, the mass media are basically not equipped to get at the real story -- to provide the accumulation of facts and data, not just the big hits, that will explain how things work. Wikipedia's Wal-Mart pages are a good start. They're augmented by sites such as Wake Up Wal-Mart, which lists news articles. More would be even better -- such as frequent reports from people in the communities where Wal-Mart operates, told by the people who work and shop there, not to mention companies affected by its practices. I wonder if this is the kind of overall tale that will be mostly told by citizen journalists.
[Dan Gillmor on Grassroots Journalism, Etc.]
10:32:20 PM
|
|
Bush: 'I Don't Want You Reading My Personal Stuff' (Reuters)
About which Kevin comments (in today's Benton Headlines):
President Bush said on Thursday he does not send e-mail, not even to
his
twin daughters, because he fears "my personal stuff" would be made
public.
Oddly enough, this was a response to a question about whether his
administration is sufficiently responsive to requests made under the
Freedom of Information Act.
12:45:11 PM
|
|
Happy Returns. Lessons from the first federal tax filings of John D. Rockefeller. By PETER DOBKIN HALL. [NYT > Opinion]
7:22:57 AM
|
|
Hacking the Papal Election.
As the College of Cardinals prepares to elect a new pope, people like me wonder about the election process. How does it work, and just how hard is it to hack the vote?
Of course I'm not advocating voter fraud in the papal election. Nor am I insinuating that a cardinal might perpetuate fraud. But people who work in security can't look at a system without trying to figure out how to break it; it's an occupational hazard.
. . .
How hard is this to hack? The first observation is that the system is entirely manual, making it immune to the sorts of technological attacks that make modern voting systems so risky. The second observation is that the small group of voters -- all of whom know each other -- makes it impossible for an outsider to affect the voting in any way. The chapel is cleared and locked before voting. No one is going to dress up as a cardinal and sneak into the Sistine Chapel. In effect, the voter verification process is about as perfect as you're ever going to find.
Eavesdropping on the process is certainly possible, although the rules explicitly state that the chapel is to be checked for recording and transmission devices "with the help of trustworthy individuals of proven technical ability." I read that the Vatican is worried about laser microphones, as there are windows near the chapel's roof.
That leaves us with insider attacks. Can a cardinal influence the election? . . . .
. . .
There's also enormous social -- religious, actually -- disincentives to hacking the vote. The election takes place in a chapel, and at an altar. They also swear an oath as they are casting their ballot -- further discouragement. And the Scrutineers are explicitly exhorted not to form any sort of cabal or make any plans to sway the election under pain of excommunication: "The Cardinal electors shall further abstain from any form of pact, agreement, promise or other commitment of any kind which could oblige them to give or deny their vote to a person or persons."
I'm sure there are negotiations and deals and influencing -- cardinals are mortal men, after all -- and such things are part of how humans come to agreement.
What are the lessons here? First, open systems conducted within a known group make voting fraud much harder. Every step of the election process is observed by everyone, and everyone knows everyone, which makes it harder for someone to get away with anything. Second, small and simple elections are easier to secure. This kind of process works to elect a Pope or a club president, but quickly becomes unwieldy for a large-scale election. The only way manual systems work is through a pyramid-like scheme, with small groups reporting their manually obtained results up the chain to more central tabulating authorities.
And a third and final lesson: when an election process is left to develop over the course of a couple thousand years, you end up with something surprisingly good.
Rules for a papal election
There's a picture of choir dress on this page
[Schneier on Security]
7:22:28 AM
|
|
WIPO turns from the dark side?.
EFF reports that WIPO seems to be responding to input from the developing world and EFF:
(Via boingboing)
We won big this week. First, there is a genuinely substantive policy discussion going on within WIPO about its obligations to be more than an IP-factory and instead explore its capacity as a positive force for the social and economic development of its member states. Not only was the majority of the meeting spent discussing the excellent Friends of Development proposal, but the good guys secured two more meetings to focus on reforming WIPO, defeating those who wanted to limit the process to a single additional meeting. Second, WIPO agreed to open the next two events to the 17 non-accredited non-government organizations (NGOs) that fought hard to attend this first meeting. [Smart Mobs]
7:14:54 AM
|
|
China's Filters Strong, Subtle. Eager to encourage economic growth by providing net access to its citizens, the country is developing powerful, broad tools to block touchy topics without alerting users that anything has been censored. [Wired News]
7:11:19 AM
|
|
Models for Sustainable Cinema Download.
I finally posted the Models for Sustainable Cinema presentation (link: PDF 2.6 MB) I gave at the San Francisco IIFF meeting. The meeting was great (thanks for the invite Thomas and the intro Carl!). Lots of excited and enthusiastic filmmakers, entrepreneurs, and financiers. The presentation was created to be given in person, so it won't have the same effect. But just imagine me waving my arms, getting all amped up, and saying things like this:
In general, filmmakers have been very slow to effectively use the web. The main problem is that we don't think of the web as an integral part of the filmmaking process. Today, a filmmaker might have a website, a Quicktime trailer of the film, some press clippings, a mailing list, and maybe even a blog. That needs to change.
I believe films need to be produced from inception with the web- and therefore the audience- in mind. I mean, if the goal is to sell your movie, then by all means don't just make your movie. What you need to do is create buzz, fans, AND a movie. And you can't expect to create buzz after the fact. The current filmmaking process is like hiding in a box for months and popping out with some new thing that no one's heard of or wants. My presentation points out ways to avoid that and make content *with* the web rather than *for* the web. 'Cause the web is people. And you just might have to include me in the creative process if you want me to watch your movie, love your movie, and tell all my friends and family to go see your movie. Heck, if you do your job right, I'll be telling everyone to come see my movie.
NOTE: By no means am I saying every independent filmmaker needs to be doing these things and that every independent film needs to focus on things like the web and buzz and fans. But if you want to make money from your film, that's what you need to do. At some point there will be services that do these things for you. Until then, if you want to make money making your own movies, start learning how to use the web.
Via ChapmanLogic [unmediated]
7:11:01 AM
|
|
Linux Distribution Tames Chaos. Have a crop of underutilized PCs but not sure how to harness their processing power? A new 6-MB Linux program can round them up into a cohesive, secure network -- no matter what operating system they use. By Alison Strahan. [Wired News]
7:07:33 AM
|
|
|
