|
|
Post by FunkySwerve on Feb 25, 2011 7:53:11 GMT
www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGZVL24rGY0If you believe in democracy, you must also embrace the free exchange of information, barring exceptional items like instructions for manufacturing nukes. This makes the Obama administration look pretty bad. I only wish Wikileaks was around during Bush. I was bawling with laughter from 'hornet's nest' on. ;D Funky
|
|
|
|
Post by MightyKhan on Feb 25, 2011 11:54:16 GMT
'remotely wiped his ipad'
ROFL
|
|
|
|
Post by Enius the White on Feb 25, 2011 20:27:43 GMT
LMAO!  Thanks |
|
|
|
Post by gollem9 on Feb 25, 2011 20:46:29 GMT
Rofl |
|
|
|
Post by axis16666 on Feb 26, 2011 5:07:54 GMT
Well, to be fair, this and quite a few other things  |
|
|
|
Post by the1kobra on Mar 1, 2011 22:45:53 GMT
You know, it's... kind of sad when the best news one can get is a station on comedy central... The first link is down, but I found this one that's up now, at least... for the moment anyway. www.yaliberty.org/posts/stephen-colbert-on-wikileaks-anonymous-and-the-obama-administrationI hear about a lot of issues like this, of course I know hackers and law are a rather crazy topic and law on them is so dense and complicated I'd never hope to wrap my head around it all, especially when it comes to international law and the actual enforceability of such law. For example, I very much doubt that a hacker in Europe could be realistically be tried in the US. From a purely ethical perspective though, I am rather disappointed in the Obama administration on this. I understand that they don't want hackers compromising sensitive data. I know all too well that such skills can be easily used for nefarious purposes, and that many times hackers using their skills use them for their own benefit with no benign motives. There's also the issue of trust, documents can be easily forged with a variety of methodologies, depending on the documents. It's still data theft after all. Yet, corporate crime does no one any good. I think if such was exposed that it should be taken advantage of, regardless of legalities. I understand that there should of course, be due process and the right to a fair trial. But it's really the responsibility of government to stop crime of any sort. And if the government isn't doing that... well... they should take the help of those who are willing to stand up to it. I know vigilantism often causes problems... but the current situation is far from ideal. It seems to me like covering such up is only worsening a problem that it is in everyone's best interest to correct. |
|
|
|
Post by Werehound Silverfang on Mar 1, 2011 23:05:06 GMT
barring exceptional items like instructions for manufacturing nukes. That is funny because the information *is* out there, to the point even on specific rotational speeds for the centrifuges required to properly refine uranium samples. Heck, my chemistry text book went into explicit detail, even naming equipment manufactures and price ranges. |
|
|
|
Post by FunkySwerve on Mar 2, 2011 1:10:59 GMT
Sure, I'm aware it's out there. It has been for years, too. Tom Clancy was fond of bemoaning this fact, even decades ago, in his works of fiction (most memorably in the Sum of All Fears). I'm not saying it's not out there, just that that kind of information is an exception to the principle.
Funky
|
|
|
|
Post by wollstonecraft on Mar 2, 2011 17:36:15 GMT
www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGZVL24rGY0If you believe in democracy, you must also embrace the free exchange of information, barring exceptional items like instructions for manufacturing nukes. Bummer. Viacom got to it before I could have a look.  -WSCraft |
|
|
|
Post by Werehound Silverfang on Mar 2, 2011 20:41:07 GMT
Follow the link in T1K's post, WSCraft.
|
|
|
|
Post by gollem9 on Mar 2, 2011 21:32:27 GMT
Yep gives me the same feeling as about geohot... -- Abstration of the real truth -------- Say I buy a computer I want to run my own proggies on it, but the EULA forbids it. (The fact that this is part of a eula already irks me) Now said company discovers that I have found a way to circumvent the "logic" that is in place that prohibits me from performing said actions and sues me based on the EULA's contents. And the result is that i can not even engage in talking public about how I did it . What I find unfair as the sued person is that at the time that I bought the computer and "legally agreed to the EULA, my computer included DVD playback functionalities, which have been stripped from my system via firmware updates (mandatory!) one year back. To me it seems that : a) The EULA that I "legally agreed on" should not allow said company to remove my dvd playback funtionality. OR b) The original EULA does not apply to my current computer, since it describes another type of computer : one with DVD playback... -------------End of abstraction of truth --------- Lol now I'm gonna get some free legal advice on EULA from our house-expert. <- Lol jk For everyone not familiar with the story : Computer = PS3 Dvd playback = PS2 backwards compatibility Own proggies = Homebrew "logic" that is in place that prohibits me from performing said actions = firmware Not talk about it anymore = He is now being sued for violating the DMCA and asking for donations to pay for his legal fees... |
|
|
|
Post by Yojimbo on Mar 3, 2011 16:45:35 GMT
I thought DVD Playback was installing Linux. To my knowledge PS2 BC was only available on select models granted the first gens are Hardware so there is no way to remove the BC while the 2nd gen I believe they switched to software emulation which I guess could have been removed.
|
|
