From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Sun Mar 1 16:54:26 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFU00K01KULFF@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 16:54:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFU00K01KUGF8@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Sun, 01 Mar 2009 16:54:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFT00301YJJL5@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 08:52:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from a-lb-ex-fastnet.listbox.com (zeppo.pobox.com [207.8.214.3]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFT0028UYJJCT@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 08:52:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-ex-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4EC8A56 for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 08:52:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by apex.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBB1B2BB7 for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 08:50:43 -0500 (EST) Received: from jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (JACKFRUIT.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.201.16]) by apex.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DEBC6C for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 08:50:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.15.9] (c-67-186-28-184.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [67.186.28.184]) (authenticated bits=0) by jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n21DnwL4008462 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 08:49:59 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 08:49:58 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Petition against Airtel "Fair Usage" Policy in India To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: <407EF0B8-762B-4301-95BC-1AC7E2F13AC0@farber.net> MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_jnsZcFV+fxegTN2m9kwlyw)" X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.201.16 X-Listbox-UUID: F2AC0EC8-0667-11DE-80EA-EAC3E5E0208B X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 --Boundary_(ID_jnsZcFV+fxegTN2m9kwlyw) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Begin forwarded message: From: David Ian Hopper Date: February 28, 2009 9:36:45 PM EST To: dave@farber.net Subject: Petition against Airtel "Fair Usage" Policy in India Dave, For IP. Caps come to India. This sounds a lot like Comcast's extra charges. Here, though, most Internet plans have a limited download cap. The writer is up in arms because it would take the described Unlimited 512K plan -- blazing fast, yes -- and throttle it down to 256K if you exceed some unspecified limit. Calling this a reference to Net Neutrality could be pandering, or some confusion on the part of the writers. That said, the writers have a point. For a country noted for its tech companies, Internet infrastructure is, as they say here, "very less." According to the following post, though, the slow-down policy has already started: http://www.techshout.com/internet/2009/18/airtel-broadband-users-up-in-arms-over-donwload-caps-on-unlimited-plans/ ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: admin@broadbandforum.in Date: Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 3:21 AM Subject: Petition against Airtel Fair Usage Policy To: imhopper@gmail.com Hi All, As some of you may know, Airtel is introducing / has introduced a new policy called the "Fair Usage Policy" (details are sketchy) that seeks to curb the amount you download using 'unlimited' internet plans. What they are trying to get away with is saying that people are using too much of the internet and thus they need to curb your downloads / speeds, rather than upgrade their own infrastructure and equipment. In an nutshell, what it means is that if you have an unlimited plan that is, say, 512kbps in speed, after a certain cap they will halve your speed to 256kbps for the rest of the month, while charging you the same amount that they have been charging you till now for 512kbps for the whole month!!! Essentially they are giving you less (up to 45% less) service but for the same price!!! And the cap can be reached in as quick as 5-6 days if you are a heavy user. While you may feel that this only affects 'heavy downloaders,' it's an important issue for all to consider as it sets a very dangerous precedent for telecom companies to start implementing all sorts of policies. The day may not be very far (in fact many internet activists around the world say it's quite near) where the ISPs will control not only your speeds and download abilities, but will control what information you can access, thereby completely destroying what made the internet what it is today - a level playing field. This is popularly known as the issue of net neutrality, which gained considerable importance in the 2008 U.S. Presidential elections (which hopefully and thankfully ended with the selection of a candidate who is for net neutrality and against allowing giant telecom companies railroad consumers in order for profit). And if you think 'downloading' is important only for people downloading pirated movies, music etc. I urge you to read this page, which describes in brief the variety of legitimate applications that are out there which would be significantly stunted with the implementation of these policies. If you are not on Airtel, don't worry - If Airtel implements this policy, your ISP will follow (soon), which is why this petition is open to all. The internet today is the single most important tool for all the essentials of modern life - communication, education, business, politics etc. etc., and I urge you to not take this matter lightly. A few of us have started an online petition in protest, which we will be sending to Mr. Sunil Bharti Mittal, Chairman & Managing Director, Bharti Airtel Ltd. after we obtain a significant number of signatures. You can find the petition here. Please do read the petition as well as the other information that is on the site, make up your own mind, and sign it if you agree with it. http://afup.broadbandforum.in/ Please do use a valid e-mail address (which will be kept confidential) as you will need to confirm your signature for it to be counted. After signing you will get an e-mail, which is highly likely to be wrongly sent to your SPAM folder. Please check there if it doesn't come in your inbox, and click on the link therein to confirm your signature. We would appreciate it if you can (BCC) forward this e-mail to others who care about the future of the Internet in India. Our thanks in advance. Supporters of net neutrality in India ------------------------------------------- --Boundary_(ID_jnsZcFV+fxegTN2m9kwlyw) Content-type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE

Begin for= warded message:

From: David Ian Hopper <imhoppe= r@gmail.com>
Date: February 28, 2009 9:36:45 PM = EST
Subject: Petition against Airtel "Fair Usage"= Policy in India

According to the following post, though, the slow-down polic= y has already started:

http://www.techshout.com/interne= t/2009/18/airtel-broadband-users-up-in-arms-over-donwload-caps-on-unl= imited-plans/

---------- Forwa= rded message ----------
From: admin@broadbandforum.in = <admi= n@broadbandforum.in>
Date: Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 3:21= AM
Subject: Petition against Airtel Fair Usage Policy
To: imhopper@gmail.com


H= i All,

As some of you may know, Airtel is introducing / has = introduced a new policy called the "Fair Usage Policy"  (details= are sketchy) that seeks to curb the amount you download using 'unlim= ited' internet plans.  What they are trying to get away with is = saying that people are using too much of the internet and thus they n= eed to curb your downloads / speeds, rather than upgrade their own in= frastructure and equipment.

In an nutshell, what it means is= that if you have an unlimited plan that is, say, 512kbps in speed, &= nbsp;after a certain cap they will halve your speed to 256kbps for th= e rest of the month, while charging you the same amount that they hav= e been charging you till now for 512kbps for the whole month!!!  = ;Essentially they are giving you less (up to 45% less) service but fo= r the same price!!!  And the cap can be reached in as quick as 5= -6 days if you are a heavy user.

While you may feel that thi= s only affects 'heavy downloaders,' it's an important issue for all t= o consider as it sets a very dangerous precedent for telecom companie= s to start implementing all sorts of policies.  The day may not = be very far (in fact many internet activists around the world say it'= s quite near) where the ISPs will control not only your speeds and do= wnload abilities, but will control what information you can access, t= hereby completely destroying what made the internet what it is today = - a level playing field.  This is popularly known as the issue o= f net neutrality, which gained considerable importance in the 2008 U.= S. Presidential elections (which hopefully and thankfully ended with = the selection of a candidate who is for net neutrality and against al= lowing giant telecom companies railroad consumers in order for profit= ).  And if you think 'downloading' is important only for people = downloading pirated movies, music etc. I urge you to read this page, = which describes in brief the variety of legitimate applications that = are out there which would be significantly stunted with the implement= ation of these policies.  If you are not on Airtel, don't worry = - If Airtel implements this policy, your ISP will follow (soon), whic= h is why this petition is open to all.

The internet today is= the single most important tool for all the essentials of modern life= - communication, education, business, politics etc. etc., and I urge= you to not take this matter lightly.

A few of us have start= ed an online petition in protest, which we will be sending to Mr. Sun= il Bharti Mittal, Chairman & Managing Director, Bharti Airtel Ltd= . after we obtain a significant number of signatures.  You can f= ind the petition here.  Please do read the petition as well as t= he other information that is on the site, make up your own mind, and = sign it if you agree with it.

http://afup.broadbandforum.in/
=
Please do use a valid e-mail address (which will be kept confid= ential) as you will need to confirm your signature for it to be count= ed.  After signing you will get an e-mail, which is highly likel= y to be wrongly sent to your SPAM folder.  Please check there if= it doesn't come in your inbox, and click on the link therein to conf= irm your signature.

We would appreciate it if you can (BCC) = forward this e-mail to others who care about the future of the Intern= et in India.

Our thanks in advance.

Supporters of n= et neutrality in India


Archives
--Boundary_(ID_jnsZcFV+fxegTN2m9kwlyw)--   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Sun Mar 1 16:54:27 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFU00K01KULFF@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 16:54:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFU00K01KUGF8@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Sun, 01 Mar 2009 16:54:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFT00301YVZZW@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 08:59:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.56]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFT002CBYVYCT@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 08:59:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACF8B8AE4 for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 09:00:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by b-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86FA516D63 for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 08:54:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (CHOKECHERRY.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.185.41]) by b-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F002016D5C for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 08:54:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.15.9] (c-67-186-28-184.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [67.186.28.184]) (authenticated bits=0) by chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n21DsDVo025652 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 08:54:14 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 08:54:13 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] New P2P Privacy System from Univ. of Washington To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.185.41 X-Listbox-UUID: 74AA066E-0668-11DE-BED6-A15BC1A22BEB X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: <200902240649.XAA13893@lariat.net> List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 At 08:47 PM 2/23/2009, Lauren Weinstein wrote: New P2P Privacy System from Univ. of Washington http://oneswarm.cs.washington.edu/ --Lauren-- -------------------------------------------   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Sun Mar 1 16:54:28 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFU00K01KULFF@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 16:54:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFU00K01KUGF8@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Sun, 01 Mar 2009 16:54:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFT00401YZW4Q@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 09:02:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.5]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFT002D9YZWCT@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 09:02:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from b-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (b-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.49]) by b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6248F15861 for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 09:02:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by b-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BB9813EF5 for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 09:02:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by b-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D01916D9D for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 08:57:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (CHOKECHERRY.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.185.41]) by b-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECBC116D98 for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 08:57:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.15.9] (c-67-186-28-184.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [67.186.28.184]) (authenticated bits=0) by chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n21DvmtO025717 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 08:57:49 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 08:57:48 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Re: Wait, Wait... The Kindle Swindle? To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.185.41 X-Listbox-UUID: F5924CBE-0668-11DE-99BC-8762C1A22BEB X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 Begin forwarded message: From: "Glenn S. Tenney" Date: February 28, 2009 2:40:37 PM EST To: David Farber Subject: Re: Wait, Wait... The Kindle Swindle? An update for the IP if you wish... This doesn't bode well for anyone who has vision problems but is otherwise able to use a Kindle. -- Glenn Tenney CISSP CISM Amazon retreats on Kindle's text-to-speech issue http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10184406-93.html Apparently, Amazon won't fight the publishing industry on the issue of whether the Kindle 2's text-to-speech function violates copyright. The retailer, which makes the popular Kindle electronic-book reader, announced late Friday that the company is modifying systems to allow authors and publishers to decide whether to enable Kindle's text-to- speech function on a per-title basis. Amazon starts its press release with tough talk. "Kindle 2's experimental text-to-speech feature is legal," Amazon wrote. "No copy is made, no derivative work is created, and no performance is being given." But then the company says: "We strongly believe many rights holders will be more comfortable with the text-to-speech feature if they are in the driver's seat," Amazon said. There is no mistaking what happened here: Amazon caved. For Kindle owners interested in the text-to-speech feature, the reader just lost value. The Authors Guild, a trade group representing 9,000 book authors had criticized Amazon since the Kindle 2 debuted earlier this month. The guild's president told CNET this week that Amazon was taking a hard- line position in discussions between the guild and the company. He also said there was a possibility that the guild could sue over the issue. "Anytime you have a new means of accessing content," said Paul Aiken, "there's always some sort of aggregator that wants to control it and keep the value for themselves." Fred von Lohmann, senior attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, an advocate group for the rights of Web users and technology companies, said he was grateful that Amazon went out of its way to make the point that the company didn't believe text-to-speech technology violated copyright. "Nevertheless, Amazon decided to allow copyright owners to make the decisions themselves whether to use the feature," von Lohmann said. "They are entitled to do that. The issue of text-to-speech will have to wait for another innovator." One point that von Lohmann noted was that there are plenty of PCs that offer text-to-speech and the Authors Guild hasn't made any objections to those. "Maybe Apple should be looking over their shoulder," he said. It's easy to understand why Amazon may have back-pedaled. Even the staunchest supporters of text-to-speech say that it won't replace audio books any time soon. Computers can sound like humans but they can't insert emphasis or offer much of a dramatic rendering because they don't yet understand what they're reading--and likely won't for a very long time, say the experts. -------------------------------------------   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Sun Mar 1 16:54:29 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFU00K01KULFF@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 16:54:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFU00K01KUGF8@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Sun, 01 Mar 2009 16:54:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFT00401Z1X5X@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 09:03:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.5]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFT002DSZ1XCT@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 09:03:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.38]) by b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B5AA15EDD for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 09:03:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29F55788816 for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 09:03:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by apex.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFB8F65 for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 08:56:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (CHOKECHERRY.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.185.41]) by apex.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DA0363 for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 08:56:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.15.9] (c-67-186-28-184.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [67.186.28.184]) (authenticated bits=0) by chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n21DuM84025705 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 08:56:23 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 08:56:22 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Re: 2 on New P2P Privacy System from Univ. of Washington To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: <3D7C3ACA-3349-4278-A7B8-A4FDC3FBBFEA@farber.net> MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.185.41 X-Listbox-UUID: CEB64FDC-0668-11DE-A22B-F2D8FA48E0DE X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: <000c01c996e6$8badd6c0$a3098440$@net> List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 Begin forwarded message: From: "George Ou" Date: February 24, 2009 8:15:27 PM EST To: "'Lauren Weinstein'" , "'Richard Bennett'" Cc: nnsquad@nnsquad.org, "'Paul Forbes'" Subject: [ NNSquad ] Re: New P2P Privacy System from Univ. of Washington So here we are with the debate on DPI. DPI is good when we use it to: * Inspect content to detect and block virus or malware signatures * Inspect content to detect and block denial of service payloads * Inspect content to detect and block spam * Inspect content to detect replicate data to cache data so that unicast audio/video delivery scales * Inspect explicit DiffServ labels to properly prioritize traffic * Inspect protocol headers to determine implicit prioritization label in the absence of explicit priority labels * Inspect content to offer targeted advertising to pay for free wireless broadband * Inspect content to offer targeted advertising to pay for free cloud email e.g., Gmail * Inspect content to offer targeted advertising when user explicitly agrees to terms and conditions DPI is bad when we use it to: * Inspect content to offer targeted advertising to users without disclosure or permission from user George Ou [ I don't know whose set of good/bad values that's supposed to be. You? Verizon? Eric Schmidt? Rush Limbaugh? Wendy Carlos? It's certainly not mine. -- Lauren Weinstein NNSquad Moderator ] -----Original Message----- From: nnsquad-bounces+george_ou=lanarchitect.net@nnsquad.org [mailto:nnsquad-bounces+george_ou=lanarchitect.net@nnsquad.org] On Behalf Of Lauren Weinstein Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 6:02 PM To: Richard Bennett Cc: nnsquad@nnsquad.org; Paul Forbes Subject: [ NNSquad ] Re: New P2P Privacy System from Univ. of Washington On 02/24 14:15, Richard Bennett wrote: > I think there's a big difference between technologies that can be > "abused by evil people" and those that are *meant to be used by > criminals in the commission of crime*. There's no legitimate reason to > mask the identities of the members of a P2P swarm in any free and > democratic country, and no chance of doing so anywhere else. This is a remarkable statement. I assume Richard means it in the context of illicit use -- but of course what is meant by "illicit" varies widely. In some countries, negative comments about the leadership can get you thrown into a dungeon or your brains blown out by government edict, courtesy of a bullet to the base of your skull. But we know that all use of P2P is not illicit by most definitions, and the percentage of illicit material in overall P2P usage is (according to the figures I've seen) dropping at a significant rate. For those of us who still believe in the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (obviously an ever smaller cult), the concept of anonymity is important, since around that revolves much of the entire problem of unreasonable search and seizure, and the related protection of legal activities. > This Washington U. stuff is just garbage. I'm sure the U. of W. team appreciates your respectful technical analysis of their efforts, Richard. > Are we doomed to transmitting a unique copy of > the entire packet stream of each episode of "American Idol" to each of > its 50 million viewers, or can we relax the layering dogma enough to > cache copies of the stream close to the end user? Bullpucky. That's a completely specious argument, and you know your technology well enough to realize that. So do most people reading this list, I'll wager. > Solving this problem will require some awareness of the content by the > delivery system, and that's not a bad thing, is it? According to > neutralist dogma, it's the Original Sin. So the choice appears to be > this: efficient networks or neutral networks, pick only one. No, the real choice is being honest about technological realities, vs. psuedo-political spins leading us toward technology's inner circle of hell. There are a multitude of topologies that would well serve mass distribution of media content over the Internet that could be deployed without creating the kind of anticompetive, inappropriately skewed and limited frameworks that have become the center of the current neutrality debate. The question is whether or not these topologies can be economically and effectively deployed given the existing warped, largely unreglated Internet telecom landscape that we must build upon to move forward. --Lauren-- NNSquad Moderator Begin forwarded message: From: "David P. Reed" Date: February 26, 2009 8:07:01 AM EST To: nnsquad@nnsquad.org Subject: [ NNSquad ] Re: New P2P Privacy System from Univ. of Washington Ou engages in egregious misrepresentation of the technical matters he suggests. I question his expertise and credentials based on this performance. I suspect his goal is FUD, since he lists a collection of implausible, infeasible, and lunatic hypotheticals to shift the argument to one about "values" where he can talk about good "ends" that would justify a slippery slope toward means. Technical comments regarding the achievability of the proposed "motivations" hypothesized are intercalated below. Essentially, Vint Cerf is right. If you want a memorable example: DPI can't stop pictures of children naked being consumed by predators either. It doesn't matter if the cause is good if the means don't achieve the goal within acceptable policy and economic bounds! Invoking bad things as reasons for a technically unsound and infeasible remedy sounds like a marketing campaign in the drug industry: "Got spam? Buy DPI! It cures all your ills, just trust George Ou". George Ou wrote: > DPI is good when we use it to: > * Inspect content to detect and block virus or malware signatures > *Blocking* is not technically feasible, contrary to claims. In order to block such content, one would have to buffer many sequential packets in a flow, holding all packets in a buffer, and only deliver packets when a unit of application data (such as an email) is complete. While programes like driftnet and etherpeek can sometimes copy such systems, a DPI based system that observed TCP packets *while buffering them* would so seriously disrupt the TCP flow control that the end system would experience disruption. As Vint Cerf said, this can only be done by higher level protocols at endpoints. Detection of content that spans multiple packets is barely possible: requires massive history and reassembly: a packet inspecting appliance in the network is really a massively ineffective place to do it. > * Inspect content to detect and block denial of service payloads > Denial of service typically involves large numbers of packets, not specific payloads. Packet counting based on destination is not "deep packet inspection" - it's inspecting IP headers, which routers can do because it's outtside the envelope. Payloads that result in denial of service are tied very closely to applications. Servers that are conservative on what they accept as requests (checking length fields, validity of fields) control their own. Conclusion: blocking infeasible, detection possible but in the wrong place. > * Inspect content to detect and block spam > Analysis is same as viruses above, plus the important issue that spam is marketing material, and the recipient may not want a censorious ISP deciding that marketing of perfectly legal things via email is "bad". Let the recipient route his/her mail through a spam filter, where it is less costly to do the filtering than it is at the packet level, and the filtering can be chosen by the user based on his/her definition of "unwanted" in the official spam definition: bulk, unwanted, commercial email. > * Inspect content to detect replicate data to cache data so that > unicast > audio/video delivery scales > Taking end-to-end traffic streams apart after buffering them to reassemble the entire stream, to do a "diff" to determine that the data is the same is also infeasible. Today every kind of media is capable of being personalized - in a web browser you don't see the same page view that everyone else does, because the source personalizes the data for each customer (ad insertion, if nothing else, is done at the source server). This is also true of video media, the dandy of "multicast" aficionados who think people watch video live in a 1950's 3 network model. Complex media cannot be transparently cached. Any caching that is useful is source-controlled, using app layer assembly - which Akamai and others support. > * Inspect explicit DiffServ labels to properly prioritize traffic > Diffserv labels are not deep packet inspection. They are IP protocol labels, and standardized independent of application. They are on the envvelope. Conclusion here: author doesn't understand diffserv. > * Inspect protocol headers to determine implicit prioritization > label in the > absence of explicit priority labels > There is no technical term: "implicit prioritization label". The idea that one can infer priority required by end user from random inputs like port numbers is out there in the culture, but there are no studies that show psychological intent can be inferred by reading protocol headers. This like reading entrails. > * Inspect content to offer targeted advertising to pay for free > wireless > broadband > Since one cannot do this in real time, it depends on an assumption: that a single user shares the IP address, and therefore can be understood by the stream of all packets coming from that address. Advertisers (maybe not ISPs?) want to know people or context, not IP addresses. Google is in a good place because one search query, coupled with a cookie that tracks the particular personal computer being used, provides strong targeting. The DPI approach is costly and less targeted. Financially a weak proposition. No clarity on how insertion might happen based on DPI. Would either need to share information with servers (sell to Google or other ad based companies) or do forcible insertion by changing expected content. For example, intercepting HTTP GETs by DNS forgery and returning other content. Google and other app layer systems already tell their users their policies with respect to this data, and one can choose not to use Google. Not ttrue for ISPs. > * Inspect content to offer targeted advertising to pay for free > cloud email > e.g., Gmail > Same as above. App services can do it better, user knows they do it, and user chooses. > * Inspect content to offer targeted advertising when user explicitly > agrees > to terms and conditions > User has an easy way to let this happen, as with Gmail, just buy your content services ion the form of an server-based application, from a vendor who adds that "feature". Technically easy, no DPI required. > > DPI is bad when we use it to: > > * Inspect content to offer targeted advertising to users without > disclosure > or permission from user > The disclosure/permission issue is real. But the technical issues are the same. -------------------------------------------   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Sun Mar 1 16:54:30 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFU00K01KULFF@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 16:54:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFU00K01KUGF8@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Sun, 01 Mar 2009 16:54:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFT00401ZD1OP@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 09:10:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.5]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFT002G4ZD1CT@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 09:10:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from b-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (b-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.49]) by b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAC0D15F63 for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 09:10:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by b-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D63913363 for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 09:10:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by apex.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FFBE68 for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 09:01:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (CHOKECHERRY.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.185.41]) by apex.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3899663 for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 09:00:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.15.9] (c-67-186-28-184.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [67.186.28.184]) (authenticated bits=0) by chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n21E0Xu6025752 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 09:00:34 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 09:00:33 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Re: Wait, Wait... The Kindle Swindle? To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_p9CoqxS/V6NeD+sQp++dbA)" X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.185.41 X-Listbox-UUID: 64F8B570-0669-11DE-B271-A2B9E663476C X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: <004e01c999c0$54fe91f0$fefbb5d0$@frankston.com> List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 --Boundary_(ID_p9CoqxS/V6NeD+sQp++dbA) Content-type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Begin forwarded message: =46rom: "Bob Frankston" Date: February 28, 2009 11:19:28 AM EST To: , "'ip'" Subject: RE: [IP] Re: Wait, Wait... The Kindle Swindle? The piano roll history is interesting. Lurking behind this is a deep philosophical question of the =20 distinction between direct and indirect action and how to map intent = =20 into an observed result. This distinction is often important in =20 religion and it goes to a moralistic framing that pervades society. We see this the difficulty in extending the concept of free speech to= =20 new technologies. We have trouble separating the speech itself from = =20 the means used. No wonder it=92s so difficult for people to grasp the concept of the = =20 Internet because much of the value derives from separating intent = =20 (application) from the means of communicating. This occurs not just = =20 once but in many ways along the path as in a web page using HTML = =20 exchanged via HTTP over IP over ... and then a third party seeing the= =20 page deems it offensive according to some local external context. We also see this in today=92s economic crisis in which we blame peopl= e =20 for the failure to predict the unknowable future. The more culpable = =20 may be those who think they do know the future and thus trade on thei= r =20 naivet=E9, especially when wrapped in the soothing fog of complex = =20 derivatives. This is why I argue for an evolutionary framing rather = =20 than a Malthusian framing for policy. Evolutionary systems capture = =20 success while surviving failures at various scales. The Kindle is just a reminder of how the old is new again in each = =20 context. =46rom: David Farber [mailto:dave@farber.net] Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2009 09:43 To: ip Subject: [IP] Re: Wait, Wait... The Kindle Swindle? Begin forwarded message: =46rom: Nathaniel Borenstein Date: February 28, 2009 8:52:15 AM EST To: dave@farber.net Cc: ip Subject: Re: [IP] Re: Wait, Wait... The Kindle Swindle? Couldn't resist one comment... On Feb 27, 2009, at 7:36 PM, David Farber wrote: =46rom: "Bob Frankston" Date: February 27, 2009 4:31:10 PM EST To: , "'ip'" Subject: RE: [IP] Wait, Wait... The Kindle Swindle? Remember that the record industry had to fight to establish the =20 principle that playing a record was not the same as performing sheet = =20 music. Fortunately we didn=92t confuse the issue by having an automat= ic =20 sheet music player as we can today (like the book reader). Would such= =20 a machine owe a royalty each time it preformed? Actually, we did have such a machine -- I think you've just described= =20 the player piano, which has had its own copyright battles: http://digital-law-online.info/lpdi1.0/treatise17.html http://www.linux-magazine.com/issues/2008/95/player_pian= o_rolls Incidentally, in tracking down those links I was totally astonished t= o =20 learn that the last piano roll factory was shut down just last month: http://odeo.com/episodes/23864527-The-Last-Player-Piano-= Roll-Soundcheck-Monday-12-January-2009 This gives me hope that my great, great, great, great, great =20 grandchildren might live to see the retirement of the last COBOL = =20 programmer. -- Nathaniel Archives =09 ------------------------------------------- --Boundary_(ID_p9CoqxS/V6NeD+sQp++dbA) Content-type: multipart/related; boundary="Boundary_(ID_eapPxZXU/Pix20ytlfuDAg)"; type="text/html" --Boundary_(ID_eapPxZXU/Pix20ytlfuDAg) Content-type: text/html; charset=WINDOWS-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE

Begin for= warded message:

From: "Bob Frankston" <Bob19-0501@bobf.frankston.com>
Date: February 2= 8, 2009 11:19:28 AM EST
Subject: RE: [IP] Re: Wait, Wait... The Kindle Swindle?

The piano roll history is interesting.
 
Lurking behind this i= s a deep philosophical question of the distinction between direct and= indirect action and how to map intent into an observed result. This = distinction is often important in religion and it goes to a moralisti= c framing that pervades society.
&n= bsp;
We see this the difficulty in extending the= concept of free speech to new technologies. We have trouble separati= ng the speech itself from the means used.
<= o:p> 
No wonder it=92s so difficult for peo= ple to grasp the concept of the Internet because much of the value de= rives from separating intent (application) from the means of communic= ating. This occurs not just once but in many ways along the path as i= n a web page using HTML exchanged via HTTP over IP over ... and then = a third party seeing the page deems it offensive according to some lo= cal external context.
 
We also see this in today=92s economic crisis in which we= blame people for the failure to predict the unknowable future. The m= ore culpable may be those who think they do know the future and thus = trade on their naivet=E9, especially when wrapped in the soothing fog= of complex derivatives. This is why I argue for an evolutionary fram= ing rather than a Malthusian framing for policy. Evolutionary systems= capture success while surviving failures at various scales.
 
The Kindle is just= a reminder of how the old is new again in each context.
 
From: David Farber [mailto:dave@farber.= net] 
Sen= t: Saturday, Fe= bruary 28, 2009 09:43
To: ip
Subject: [IP] Re: Wait, Wait... The Kindle Swindle?
 
 
 
On Feb 27,= 2009, at 7:36 PM, David Farber wrote:
=


 
Incidentally, in tracking down those links I was totally ast= onished to learn that the last piano roll factory was shut down just = last month:
 
&n= bsp;
This gives me hope that my gr= eat, great, great, great, great grandchildren might live to see the r= etirement of the last COBOL programmer.  -- Nathaniel
 
 
<= tr>
Archives
--Boundary_(ID_eapPxZXU/Pix20ytlfuDAg) Content-id: Content-type: image/jpeg; x-unix-mode=0666; name=feed-icon-10x10.jpg Content-transfer-encoding: BASE64 Content-disposition: inline; filename=feed-icon-10x10.jpg /9j/4AAQSkZJRgABAQEARwBHAAD/2wBDAAYEBAQFBAYFBQYJBgUGCQsIBgYICwwK CgsKCgwQDAwMDAwMEAwODxAPDgwTExQUExMcGxsbHCAgICAgICAgICD/2wBDAQcH Bw0MDRgQEBgaFREVGiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICD/wAARCAAKAAoDAREAAhEBAxEB/8QAFgABAQEAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAABgAH/8QAIRAAAgEEAgIDAAAAAAAAAAAAAQIDBAUREgAhBiIxMkH/xAAX AQADAQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABQYE/8QAJBEAAQQBAwMFAAAAAAAAAAAAAQIDESEA BDFBEnGBEzJRYbH/2gAMAwEAAhEDEQA/ANZttioqi0QtUJpVzfWpOyuWkk0V29mW RDIwUnAIzyUb06XWxO558xO9iaOxGVLupUhwx7Rx47UYvkHCRv1dETEZpEKeum7D GOsYz+cwy4Kk19409BBuBl5AStXOqnVVkdVA6AAb4HBVLMfJ/cNPaB2xXabTapLV RySUcDu8EbMzRoSSUGSTjjtppPSKG2Jn31hZs7nnP//Z --Boundary_(ID_eapPxZXU/Pix20ytlfuDAg)-- --Boundary_(ID_p9CoqxS/V6NeD+sQp++dbA)--   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Sun Mar 1 16:54:32 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFU00K01KULFF@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 16:54:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFU00K01KUGF8@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Sun, 01 Mar 2009 16:54:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFU00A012XVLB@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 10:27:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.56]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFU009522XUS8@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 10:27:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80C489AB3 for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 10:27:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B12A12CD3 for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 10:21:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (CHOKECHERRY.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.185.41]) by a-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C85CF12CCE for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 10:21:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.15.9] (c-67-186-28-184.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [67.186.28.184]) (authenticated bits=0) by chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n21FL9Qg026660 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 10:21:37 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 10:21:36 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Porn in the USA: Conservatives are biggest consumers To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.185.41 X-Listbox-UUID: A93A5F30-0674-11DE-8563-7221B4A18844 X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 Begin forwarded message: From: Jim Warren Date: February 28, 2009 4:27:59 PM EST To: Dave Farber Subject: Porn in the USA: Conservatives are biggest consumers From the New Scientist - http://bit.ly/ZkOq 27 February 2009 by Ewen Callaway Americans may paint themselves in increasingly bright shades of red and blue, but new research finds one thing that varies little across the nation: the liking for online pornography. A new nationwide study (pdf) of anonymised credit-card receipts from a major online adult entertainment provider finds little variation in consumption between states. "When it comes to adult entertainment, it seems people are more the same than different," says Benjamin Edelman at Harvard Business School. However, there are some trends to be seen in the data. Those states that do consume the most porn tend to be more conservative and religious than states with lower levels of consumption, the study finds. ...... -------------------------------------------   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Sun Mar 1 16:54:33 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFU00K01KULFF@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 16:54:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFU00K01KUGF8@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Sun, 01 Mar 2009 16:54:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFU00N019PEYB@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 12:53:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from a-lb-ex-fastnet.listbox.com (zeppo.pobox.com [207.8.214.3]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFU00IC39PDX2@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 12:53:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-ex-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC305D1 for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 12:53:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-mx-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA296781 for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 12:52:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (CHOKECHERRY.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.185.41]) by a-lb-mx-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40217780 for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 12:52:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.15.9] (c-67-186-28-184.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [67.186.28.184]) (authenticated bits=0) by chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n21HoOMn028681 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 12:52:15 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 12:52:15 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Re: DPI -- Protecting the past from the future To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_3JWQ/YQaYiid3SgDDof7DA)" X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.185.41 X-Listbox-UUID: B610B41A-0689-11DE-8C17-36E9E388361A X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: <020101c99a89$50b7ce30$f2276a90$@frankston.com> List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 --Boundary_(ID_3JWQ/YQaYiid3SgDDof7DA) Content-type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Begin forwarded message: =46rom: "Bob Frankston" Date: March 1, 2009 11:18:09 AM EST To: , "'ip'" Cc: "'Lauren Weinstein'" Subject: DPI -- Protecting the past from the future Absolute control of the network means the absolute power to impose th= e =20 na=EFve and counter-productive policies on our ability to communicate= =20 and our ability to create new value. I could argue the technical points of the DPI rationales cited below = =96 =20 but I=92ve done that too many times (though it can fun). The real = =20 question is why people insist on the necessity of value-based routing= ? =20 There seems to be a failure to appreciate the intrinsic ambiguities = =20 I=92ve written about. DPI is an extreme case =96 it=92s as if we weren=92t just trying to r= ecreate =20 the intelligent network but going all the way to the psychic network. But there is still the issue of trying to ban =93bad=94 behavior. Onc= e =20 again have we forgotten the modem crises in which dialup users were = =20 indeed badly behaved and threatening the integrity of the phone =20 network? Imagine if the carriers had been able to impose their well-= =20 intentioned but utterly na=EFve idea of how to run a phone system (li= ke =20 a railroad) on us. Not that the effort was well-intentioned, but even= =20 if it were it would have been problematic. We=92ve seen this again an= d =20 again be it Hush-a-Phone or Webcams. The =93bad=94 is a necessary ste= p on =20 the path to =93far better=94. Perhaps the kind of dichotomy that George Lakoff cited in Moral =20 Politics can give us some understanding of the presumption that we = =20 must and that we can control the meaning of the bits in the network. But there is also a business rationale =96 if we could do our own = =20 networking better without these policies then why do we hand control = =20 over to a telecom industry that insists on charging us for these = =20 =93favors=94? Controlling malware and other problems is indeed important but =20 fixating on DPI is a diversion =96 like assuming could solve our = =20 national security problems by just torturing a few more people. -----Original Message----- =46rom: David Farber [mailto:dave@farber.net] Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2009 08:56 To: ip Subject: [IP] Re: 2 on New P2P Privacy System from Univ. of Washingto= n Begin forwarded message: =46rom: "George Ou" Date: February 24, 2009 8:15:27 PM EST To: "'Lauren Weinstein'" , "'Richard Bennett'" Cc: nnsquad@nnsquad.org, "'Paul Forbes'" Subject: [ NNSquad ] Re: New P2P Privacy System from Univ. of Washington So here we are with the debate on DPI. DPI is good when we use it to: * Inspect content to detect and block virus or malware signatures * Inspect content to detect and block denial of service payloads * Inspect content to detect and block spam * Inspect content to detect replicate data to cache data so that unic= ast audio/video delivery scales * Inspect explicit DiffServ labels to properly prioritize traffic * Inspect protocol headers to determine implicit prioritization label in the absence of explicit priority labels * Inspect content to offer targeted advertising to pay for free wirel= ess broadband * Inspect content to offer targeted advertising to pay for free cloud email e.g., Gmail * Inspect content to offer targeted advertising when user explicitly agrees to terms and conditions DPI is bad when we use it to: * Inspect content to offer targeted advertising to users without disclosure or permission from user George Ou [ I don't know whose set of good/bad values that's supposed to = be. You? Verizon? Eric Schmidt? Rush Limbaugh? Wendy Carlos? It's certainly not mine. -- Lauren Weinstein NNSquad Moderator ] -----Original Message----- =46rom: nnsquad-bounces+george_ou=3Dlanarchitect.net@nnsquad.org [mailto:nnsquad-bounces+george_ou=3Dlanarchitect.net@nnsquad.org] On Behalf Of Lauren Weinstein Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 6:02 PM To: Richard Bennett Cc: nnsquad@nnsquad.org; Paul Forbes Subject: [ NNSquad ] Re: New P2P Privacy System from Univ. of Washing= ton On 02/24 14:15, Richard Bennett wrote: > I think there's a big difference between technologies that can be > "abused by evil people" and those that are *meant to be used by > criminals in the commission of crime*. There's no legitimate reaso= n =20 to > mask the identities of the members of a P2P swarm in any free and > democratic country, and no chance of doing so anywhere else. This is a remarkable statement. I assume Richard means it in the context of illicit use -- but of course what is meant by "illicit" varies widely. In some countries, negative comments about the leadership can get you thrown into a dungeon or your brains blown out by government edict, courtesy of a bullet to the base of your skull. But we know that all use of P2P is not illicit by most definitions, and the percentage of illicit material in overall P2P usage is (according to the figures I've seen) dropping at a significant rate. For those of us who still believe in the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (obviously an ever smaller cult), the concept of anonymity is important, since around that revolves much of the entire problem of unreasonable search and seizure, and the related protectio= n of legal activities. > This Washington U. stuff is just garbage. I'm sure the U. of W. team appreciates your respectful technical analysis of their efforts, Richard. > Are we doomed to transmitting a unique copy of > the entire packet stream of each episode of "American Idol" to eac= h =20 of > its 50 million viewers, or can we relax the layering dogma enough = to > cache copies of the stream close to the end user? Bullpucky. That's a completely specious argument, and you know your technology well enough to realize that. So do most people reading th= is list, I'll wager. > Solving this problem will require some awareness of the content by= =20 the > delivery system, and that's not a bad thing, is it? According to > neutralist dogma, it's the Original Sin. So the choice appears to = be > this: efficient networks or neutral networks, pick only one. No, the real choice is being honest about technological realities, vs= . psuedo-political spins leading us toward technology's inner circle of hell. There are a multitude of topologies that would well serve mass distribution of media content over the Internet that could be deploye= d without creating the kind of anticompetive, inappropriately skewed an= d limited frameworks that have become the center of the current neutrality debate. The question is whether or not these topologies can be economically and effectively deployed given the existing warped, largely unreglated Internet telecom landscape that we must build upon to move forward. --Lauren-- NNSquad Moderator Begin forwarded message: =46rom: "David P. Reed" Date: February 26, 2009 8:07:01 AM EST To: nnsquad@nnsquad.org Subject: [ NNSquad ] Re: New P2P Privacy System from Univ. of Washington Ou engages in egregious misrepresentation of the technical matters he suggests. I question his expertise and credentials based on this performance. I suspect his goal is FUD, since he lists a collection of implausible, infeasible, and lunatic hypotheticals to shift the argument to one about "values" where he can talk about good "ends" that would justify a slippery slope toward means. Technical comments regarding the achievability of the proposed "motivations" hypothesized are intercalated below. Essentially, Vint Cerf is right. If you want a memorable example: DPI can't stop pictures of children naked being consumed by predators either. It doesn't matter if the cause is good if the means don't achieve the goal within acceptable policy and economic bounds! Invoking bad things as reasons for a technically unsound and infeasible remedy sounds like a marketing campaign in the drug industry: "Got spam? Buy DPI! It cures all your ills, just trust George Ou". George Ou wrote: > DPI is good when we use it to: > * Inspect content to detect and block virus or malware signatures > *Blocking* is not technically feasible, contrary to claims. In order to block such content, one would have to buffer many sequential packets in a flow, holding all packets in a buffer, and only deliver packets when a unit of application data (such as an email) is complete. While programes like driftnet and etherpeek can sometimes copy such systems, a DPI based system that observed TCP packets *whil= e buffering them* would so seriously disrupt the TCP flow control that the end system would experience disruption. As Vint Cerf said, this can only be done by higher level protocols at endpoints. Detection of content that spans multiple packets is barely possible: requires massive history and reassembly: a packet inspecting applianc= e in the network is really a massively ineffective place to do it. > * Inspect content to detect and block denial of service payloads > Denial of service typically involves large numbers of packets, not specific payloads. Packet counting based on destination is not "deep packet inspection" - it's inspecting IP headers, which routers can do because it's outtside the envelope. Payloads that result in denial of service are tied very closely to applications. Servers that are conservative on what they accept as requests (checking length fields, validity of fields) control their o= wn. Conclusion: blocking infeasible, detection possible but in the wrong place. > * Inspect content to detect and block spam > Analysis is same as viruses above, plus the important issue that spam is marketing material, and the recipient may not want a censorious IS= P deciding that marketing of perfectly legal things via email is "bad". Let the recipient route his/her mail through a spam filter, where it is less costly to do the filtering than it is at the packet level, an= d the filtering can be chosen by the user based on his/her definition o= f "unwanted" in the official spam definition: bulk, unwanted, commercia= l email. > * Inspect content to detect replicate data to cache data so that > unicast > audio/video delivery scales > Taking end-to-end traffic streams apart after buffering them to reassemble the entire stream, to do a "diff" to determine that the data is the same is also infeasible. Today every kind of media is capable of being personalized - in a web browser you don't see the same page view that everyone else does, because the source personalizes the data for each customer (ad insertion, if nothing else, is done at the source server). This is also true of video media, the dandy of "multicast" aficionados who think people watch video live in a 1950's 3 network model. Complex media cannot be transparently cached. Any caching that is useful is source-controlled, using app layer assembly - which Akamai and others support. > * Inspect explicit DiffServ labels to properly prioritize traffic > Diffserv labels are not deep packet inspection. They are IP protocol labels, and standardized independent of application. They are on the envvelope. Conclusion here: author doesn't understand diffserv. > * Inspect protocol headers to determine implicit prioritization > label in the > absence of explicit priority labels > There is no technical term: "implicit prioritization label". The ide= a that one can infer priority required by end user from random inputs like port numbers is out there in the culture, but there are no studies that show psychological intent can be inferred by reading protocol headers. This like reading entrails. > * Inspect content to offer targeted advertising to pay for free > wireless > broadband > Since one cannot do this in real time, it depends on an assumption: that a single user shares the IP address, and therefore can be understood by the stream of all packets coming from that address. Advertisers (maybe not ISPs?) want to know people or context, not IP addresses. Google is in a good place because one search query, coupled with a cookie that tracks the particular personal computer being used, provides strong targeting. The DPI approach is costly an= d less targeted. Financially a weak proposition. No clarity on how insertion might happen based on DPI. Would either need to share information with servers (sell to Google or other ad based companies) or do forcible insertion by changing expected content. For example, intercepting HTTP GETs by DNS forgery and returning other content. Google and other app layer systems already tell their users their policies with respect to this data, and one can choose not to use Google. Not ttrue for ISPs. > * Inspect content to offer targeted advertising to pay for free > cloud email > e.g., Gmail > Same as above. App services can do it better, user knows they do it= , and user chooses. > * Inspect content to offer targeted advertising when user explicit= ly > agrees > to terms and conditions > User has an easy way to let this happen, as with Gmail, just buy your content services ion the form of an server-based application, from a vendor who adds that "feature". Technically easy, no DPI required. > > DPI is bad when we use it to: > > * Inspect content to offer targeted advertising to users without > disclosure > or permission from user > The disclosure/permission issue is real. But the technical issues ar= e the same. ------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------- --Boundary_(ID_3JWQ/YQaYiid3SgDDof7DA) Content-type: text/html; charset=WINDOWS-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE

Begin for= warded message:

From: "Bob Frankston" <Bob19-0501@bobf.frankston.com>
Date: March 1, 2= 009 11:18:09 AM EST
Cc: "'Lauren W= einstein'" <lauren@vortex.com= >
Subject: DPI -- Protecting the past from the = future

Absolute cont= rol of the network means the absolute power to impose the na=EFve and= counter-productive policies on our ability to communicate and our ab= ility to create new value.
 
I could argue the technical points of the D= PI rationales cited below =96 but I=92ve done that too many times (th= ough it can fun). The real question is why people insist on the neces= sity of value-based routing? There seems to be a failure to appreciat= e the intrinsic ambiguities I=92ve written about.
 
DPI is an extreme ca= se =96 it=92s as if we weren=92t just trying to recreate the intellig= ent network but going all the way to the psychic network.<= /span>
 
But there is= still the issue of trying to ban =93bad=94 behavior. Once again have= we forgotten the modem crises in which dialup users were indeed badl= y behaved and threatening the integrity of the phone network? Imagine= if the carriers had been able to impose their well-intentioned but u= tterly na=EFve idea of how to run a phone system (like a railroad) on= us. Not that the effort was well-intentioned, but even if it were it= would have been problematic. We=92ve seen this again and again be it= Hush-a-Phone or Webcams. The =93bad=94 is a necessary step on the pa= th to =93far better=94.
 
Perhaps the kind of dichotomy that George L= akoff cited in M= oral Politics c= an give us some understanding of the presumption that we must and tha= t we can control the meaning of the bits in the network.
 
But there is = also a business rationale =96 if we could do our own networking bette= r without these policies then why do we hand control over to a teleco= m industry that insists on charging us for these =93favors=94?
 = ;
Control= ling malware and other problems is indeed important but fixating on D= PI is a diversion =96 like assuming could solve our national security= problems by just torturing a few more people.
 
&n= bsp;
Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2009 08:56
To: ip
Subjec= t: [IP] Re: 2 on New P2P Privacy System from Univ. of Washington=
 
 
 =
Begin forwarded message:
 <= /div>
From: "George Ou" <george_ou@lana= rchitect.net>
Date: February 24, 2009 8:15:27 P= M EST
To: "'Lauren Weinstein'" <lauren@vortex.com>, "'Richard Bennett'" <richard@bennett.com
 >
Subject: [ = NNSquad ] Re: New P2P Privacy System from Univ. of  
Washington
 
So here we = are with the debate on DPI.
 
DPI = is good when we use it to:
 
* Ins= pect content to detect and block virus or malware signatures
* Inspect content to detect and block denial of service payloa= ds
* Inspect content to detect and block spam
* Inspect content to detect replicate data to cache data so th= at unicast
audio/video delivery scales
= * Inspect explicit DiffServ labels to properly prioritize traffic
* Inspect protocol headers to determine implicit prioriti= zation label 
in the
absence of = explicit priority labels
* Inspect content to offer ta= rgeted advertising to pay for free wireless
broadband<= o:p>
* Inspect content to offer targeted advertising to pay= for free cloud 
email
e.g., Gmail=
* Inspect content to offer targeted advertising when = user explicitly 
agrees
to terms a= nd conditions
 
 <= /div>
DPI is bad when we use it to:
 
disclosure
or permission from user<= o:p>
 
George Ou
&n= bsp;
     [ I don't know whose set of g= ood/bad values that's supposed to be.
  &nbs= p;    You?  Verizon?  Eric Schmidt?  Ru= sh Limbaugh?  Wendy Carlos?
   &nb= sp;   It's certainly not mine.
 =
         &nbs= p;   -- Lauren Weinstein
   &= nbsp;          &nbs= p; NNSquad Moderator ]
 
&nbs= p;
 
-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of
Lauren Weinstein
Sent:= Tuesday, February 24, 2009 6:02 PM
To: Richard Bennet= t
Cc: nnsquad@nnsquad.org; Paul Forbes
Subject: [ NNSquad ] Re: New P2P Privacy System from Univ. of = Washington
 
On 02/24 14:15, Richa= rd Bennett wrote:
> I think there's a big differenc= e between technologies that can be
> "abused by evi= l people" and those that are *meant to be used by
>= criminals in the commission of crime*. There's no legitimate reason = to
> mask the identities of the members of a P2P sw= arm in any free and
> democratic country, and no ch= ance of doing so anywhere else.
 
= This is a remarkable statement.  I assume Richard means it in th= e
context of illicit use -- but of course what is mean= t by "illicit"
varies widely.  In some countries,= negative comments about the
leadership can get you th= rown into a dungeon or your brains blown out
by govern= ment edict, courtesy of a bullet to the base of your skull.
 
But we know that all use of P2P is not il= licit by most definitions,
and the percentage of illic= it material in overall P2P usage is
(according to the = figures I've seen) dropping at a significant rate.
 
For those of us who still believe in the Fourth Am= endment to the U.S.
Constitution (obviously an ever sm= aller cult), the concept of
anonymity is important, si= nce around that revolves much of the entire
problem of= unreasonable search and seizure, and the related protection
of legal activities.
 
>= This Washington U. stuff is just garbage.
 =
I'm sure the U. of W. team appreciates your respectful tec= hnical
analysis of their efforts, Richard.<= /div>
 
> Are we doomed to transmitting a unique= copy of
> the entire packet stream of each episode= of "American Idol" to each of
> its 50 million vie= wers, or can we relax the layering dogma enough to
>= ; cache copies of the stream close to the end user?
<= div style=3D"margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.000= 1pt; margin-left: 0in; font-size: 10.5pt; font-family: Consolas; "> 
Bullpucky.  That's a completely specious arg= ument, and you know your
technology well enough to rea= lize that.  So do most people reading this
list, = I'll wager.
 
> Solving this pr= oblem will require some awareness of the content by the
> neutralist dogma, it's the Original Sin. So th= e choice appears to be
> this: efficient networks o= r neutral networks, pick only one.
 
psuedo-political spins leading us toward technolo= gy's inner circle
of hell.
 =
There are a multitude of topologies that would well serve = mass
distribution of media content over the Internet t= hat could be deployed
without creating the kind of ant= icompetive, inappropriately skewed and
limited fra= meworks that have become the center of the current
neu= trality debate.  The question is whether or not these topologies=
can be economically and effectively deployed given th= e existing
warped, largely unreglated Internet telecom= landscape that we must
build upon to move forward.
 
--Lauren--
NNSquad = Moderator
 
 
=  
 
Begin forwarded message:<= o:p>
 
From: "David P. Reed" <dpreed@reed.com>
Date: February 26,= 2009 8:07:01 AM EST
goal within acceptabl= e policy and economic bounds!  Invoking bad 
things as reasons for a technically unsound and infeasible remedy&nb= sp;
sounds like a marketing campaign in the drug indus= try: "Got spam? Buy 
DPI! It cures all your ills,= just trust George Ou".
George Ou wrote:
> * Inspect c= ontent to detect and block virus or malware signatures
> 
*Blocking* is not technically feasible, co= ntrary to claims.  In order 
to block su= ch content, one would have to buffer many sequential =
packets in a flow, holding all packets in a buffer, and only del= iver 
packets when a unit of application data (su= ch as an email) is 
complete.  While program= es like driftnet and etherpeek can sometimes 
cop= y such systems, a DPI based system that observed TCP packets *while&n= bsp;
buffering them* would so seriously disrupt the TC= P flow control that 
the end system would experie= nce disruption.  As Vint Cerf said, this 
<= div style=3D"margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.000= 1pt; margin-left: 0in; font-size: 10.5pt; font-family: Consolas; ">ca= n only be done by higher level protocols at endpoints.
 
Detection of content that spans multiple packe= ts is barely possible: 
requires massive history = and reassembly: a packet inspecting appliance 
<= div style=3D"margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.000= 1pt; margin-left: 0in; font-size: 10.5pt; font-family: Consolas; ">in= the network is really a massively ineffective place to do it.
> * Inspect content to detect and block denial of service= payloads
> 
Denial of service = typically involves large numbers of packets, not 
specific payloads. Packet counting based on destination is not "deep=  
packet inspection" - it's inspecting IP headers= , which routers can do 
because it's outtside the= envelope.
 
Payloads that result = in denial of service are tied very closely to 
<= div style=3D"margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.000= 1pt; margin-left: 0in; font-size: 10.5pt; font-family: Consolas; ">ap= plications.  Servers that are conservative on what they accept a= s 
requests (checking length fields, validity of = fields) control their own.
 
Concl= usion: blocking infeasible, detection possible but in the wrong =
>=  
> 
Diffserv labels are not deep packet inspection.  They are IP pr= otocol 
labels, and standardized independent of a= pplication.  They are on the 
envvelope.<= o:p>
 
Conclusion here: author doesn't = understand diffserv.
> * Inspect protocol headers t= o determine implicit prioritization 
> label = in the
> absence of explicit priority labels
> 
There is no technical term: "impli= cit prioritization label".  The idea 
that o= ne can infer priority required by end user from random inputs 
like port numbers is out there in the culture, but ther= e are no 
studies that show psychological intent = can be inferred by reading 
protocol headers.&nbs= p; This like reading entrails.
> * Inspect content = to offer targeted advertising to pay for free 
<= div style=3D"margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.000= 1pt; margin-left: 0in; font-size: 10.5pt; font-family: Consolas; ">&g= t; wireless
bei= ng used, provides strong targeting.  The DPI approach is costly = and 
nee= d to share information with servers (sell to Google or other ad =
polic= ies with respect to this data, and one can choose not to use 
=
a= nd user chooses.
> * Inspect content to offer targe= ted advertising when user explicitly 
> agrees=
> to terms and conditions
>=  
User has an easy way to let this happen, as with Gma= il, just buy your 
content services ion the form = of an server-based application, from a 
vendor wh= o adds that "feature". Technically easy, no DPI required.<= /div>
> 
> DPI is bad when we use it to:=
> 
> * Inspect content to offer = targeted advertising to users without 
> discl= osure
> or permission from user
>=  
The disclosure/permission issue is real.  = But the technical issues are 
the same.
 
 

Archives
--Boundary_(ID_3JWQ/YQaYiid3SgDDof7DA)--   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Sun Mar 1 16:54:35 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFU00K01KULFF@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 16:54:22 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFU00K01KUGF8@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Sun, 01 Mar 2009 16:54:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFU00O019YYET@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 12:59:22 -0500 (EST) Received: from b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.5]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFU00N9V9YX3D@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 12:59:22 -0500 (EST) Received: from b-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (b-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.49]) by b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33A8B15C93 for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 12:59:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by b-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22FF8137D8 for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 12:59:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64B60121EB for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 12:54:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (JACKFRUIT.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.201.16]) by a-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B305121E3 for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 12:54:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.15.9] (c-67-186-28-184.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [67.186.28.184]) (authenticated bits=0) by jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n21HsS0Y011463 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 12:54:51 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 12:54:51 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Re: Wait, Wait... The Kindle Swindle? To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: <721B8158-0819-476E-9C3B-E79315ECCCA6@farber.net> MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.201.16 X-Listbox-UUID: 124B24D6-068A-11DE-8E21-A60DB4A18844 X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: <49AAB094.2090303@madriver.com> List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 Begin forwarded message: From: Tony Lauck Date: March 1, 2009 10:58:12 AM EST To: dave@farber.net Subject: Re: [IP] Re: Wait, Wait... The Kindle Swindle? So far as I know, there is only one solution to all of this nonsense and that is to ditch the Intellectual Property laws. The case is well made in the book "Against Intellectual Monopoly" by Michele Boldrin and David K. Levine: http://www.amazon.com/Against-Intellectual-Monopoly-Michele-Boldrin/dp/0521879280 The authors practice what they preach and the book can be freely downloaded: http://levine.sscnet.ucla.edu/general/intellectual/against.htm Tony Lauck https://www.aglauck.com P.S. You won't see me buying a Kindle or any other device whose sole reason for existence is to enforce DRM. David Farber wrote: > Begin forwarded message: > From: "Glenn S. Tenney" > Date: February 28, 2009 2:40:37 PM EST > To: David Farber > Subject: Re: Wait, Wait... The Kindle Swindle? > An update for the IP if you wish... > This doesn't bode well for anyone who has vision problems but is > otherwise able to use a Kindle. > -- > Glenn Tenney CISSP CISM > Amazon retreats on Kindle's text-to-speech issue > http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10184406-93.html > Apparently, Amazon won't fight the publishing industry on the issue > of whether the Kindle 2's text-to-speech function violates copyright. > The retailer, which makes the popular Kindle electronic-book reader, > announced late Friday that the company is modifying systems to allow > authors and publishers to decide whether to enable Kindle's text-to- > speech function on a per-title basis. > Amazon starts its press release with tough talk. "Kindle 2's > experimental text-to-speech feature is legal," Amazon wrote. "No > copy is made, no derivative work is created, and no performance is > being given." > But then the company says: "We strongly believe many rights holders > will be more comfortable with the text-to-speech feature if they are > in the driver's seat," Amazon said. > There is no mistaking what happened here: Amazon caved. For Kindle > owners interested in the text-to-speech feature, the reader just > lost value. > The Authors Guild, a trade group representing 9,000 book authors had > criticized Amazon since the Kindle 2 debuted earlier this month. The > guild's president told CNET this week that Amazon was taking a hard- > line position in discussions between the guild and the company. He > also said there was a possibility that the guild could sue over the > issue. > "Anytime you have a new means of accessing content," said Paul > Aiken, "there's always some sort of aggregator that wants to control > it and keep the value for themselves." > Fred von Lohmann, senior attorney at the Electronic Frontier > Foundation, an advocate group for the rights of Web users and > technology companies, said he was grateful that Amazon went out of > its way to make the point that the company didn't believe text-to- > speech technology violated copyright. > "Nevertheless, Amazon decided to allow copyright owners to make the > decisions themselves whether to use the feature," von Lohmann said. > "They are entitled to do that. The issue of text-to-speech will have > to wait for another innovator." > One point that von Lohmann noted was that there are plenty of PCs > that offer text-to-speech and the Authors Guild hasn't made any > objections to those. "Maybe Apple should be looking over their > shoulder," he said. > It's easy to understand why Amazon may have back-pedaled. Even the > staunchest supporters of text-to-speech say that it won't replace > audio books any time soon. Computers can sound like humans but they > can't insert emphasis or offer much of a dramatic rendering because > they don't yet understand what they're reading--and likely won't for > a very long time, say the experts. -------------------------------------------   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Sun Mar 1 16:54:36 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFU00K01KULFF@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 16:54:22 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFU00K01KUGF8@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Sun, 01 Mar 2009 16:54:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFU00P01ADX18@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 13:08:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.5]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFU00ND5ADX3D@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 13:08:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.38]) by b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A1C0151C9 for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 13:08:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 849DE79083F for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 13:08:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by apex.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E4B66C for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 12:54:56 -0500 (EST) Received: from jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (JACKFRUIT.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.201.16]) by apex.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1A3F63 for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 12:54:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.15.9] (c-67-186-28-184.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [67.186.28.184]) (authenticated bits=0) by jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n21HsS0X011463 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 12:54:28 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 12:54:08 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Re: 2 on New P2P Privacy System from Univ. of Washington To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.201.16 X-Listbox-UUID: 12862C16-068A-11DE-BA7C-BB05BEC76BE0 X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: <49AAB97E.4040503@ccr.org> List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 Begin forwarded message: From: "Michael O'Dell" Date: March 1, 2009 11:36:14 AM EST To: dave@farber.net Subject: Re: [IP] Re: 2 on New P2P Privacy System from Univ. of Washington I admit to no debate on Deep Packet Inspection by ISPs, advertisers, or other assorted evesdroppers. It is very, very simple and as black-and-white as they come: It is WRONG and Deeply Evil. There is no righteous purpose, period. Full Stop. The fact that various government agencies are very good at it is irrelevant. "When the President does it, it's STILL Wrong." To borrow a phrase from an alternate universe: "Deep Packet Inspection: Just Say NO!" Yours for continuing moral clarity, -mo > From: "George Ou" > Date: February 24, 2009 8:15:27 PM EST > To: "'Lauren Weinstein'" , "'Richard Bennett'" > > Cc: nnsquad@nnsquad.org, "'Paul Forbes'" > Subject: [ NNSquad ] Re: New P2P Privacy System from Univ. of > Washington > So here we are with the debate on DPI. > DPI is good when we use it to: > * Inspect content to detect and block virus or malware signatures > * Inspect content to detect and block denial of service payloads > * Inspect content to detect and block spam > * Inspect content to detect replicate data to cache data so that > unicast > audio/video delivery scales > * Inspect explicit DiffServ labels to properly prioritize traffic > * Inspect protocol headers to determine implicit prioritization > label in the > absence of explicit priority labels > * Inspect content to offer targeted advertising to pay for free > wireless > broadband > * Inspect content to offer targeted advertising to pay for free > cloud email > e.g., Gmail > * Inspect content to offer targeted advertising when user explicitly > agrees > to terms and conditions > DPI is bad when we use it to: > * Inspect content to offer targeted advertising to users without > disclosure > or permission from user > George Ou > [ I don't know whose set of good/bad values that's supposed to be. > You? Verizon? Eric Schmidt? Rush Limbaugh? Wendy Carlos? > It's certainly not mine. > -- Lauren Weinstein > NNSquad Moderator ] > -----Original Message----- > From: nnsquad-bounces+george_ou=lanarchitect.net@nnsquad.org > [mailto:nnsquad-bounces+george_ou=lanarchitect.net@nnsquad.org] On > Behalf Of > Lauren Weinstein > Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 6:02 PM > To: Richard Bennett > Cc: nnsquad@nnsquad.org; Paul Forbes > Subject: [ NNSquad ] Re: New P2P Privacy System from Univ. of > Washington > On 02/24 14:15, Richard Bennett wrote: >> I think there's a big difference between technologies that can be >> "abused by evil people" and those that are *meant to be used by >> criminals in the commission of crime*. There's no legitimate reason >> to >> mask the identities of the members of a P2P swarm in any free and >> democratic country, and no chance of doing so anywhere else. > This is a remarkable statement. I assume Richard means it in the > context of illicit use -- but of course what is meant by "illicit" > varies widely. In some countries, negative comments about the > leadership can get you thrown into a dungeon or your brains blown out > by government edict, courtesy of a bullet to the base of your skull. > But we know that all use of P2P is not illicit by most definitions, > and the percentage of illicit material in overall P2P usage is > (according to the figures I've seen) dropping at a significant rate. > For those of us who still believe in the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. > Constitution (obviously an ever smaller cult), the concept of > anonymity is important, since around that revolves much of the entire > problem of unreasonable search and seizure, and the related protection > of legal activities. >> This Washington U. stuff is just garbage. > I'm sure the U. of W. team appreciates your respectful technical > analysis of their efforts, Richard. >> Are we doomed to transmitting a unique copy of >> the entire packet stream of each episode of "American Idol" to each >> of >> its 50 million viewers, or can we relax the layering dogma enough to >> cache copies of the stream close to the end user? > Bullpucky. That's a completely specious argument, and you know your > technology well enough to realize that. So do most people reading > this > list, I'll wager. >> Solving this problem will require some awareness of the content by >> the >> delivery system, and that's not a bad thing, is it? According to >> neutralist dogma, it's the Original Sin. So the choice appears to be >> this: efficient networks or neutral networks, pick only one. > No, the real choice is being honest about technological realities, vs. > psuedo-political spins leading us toward technology's inner circle > of hell. > There are a multitude of topologies that would well serve mass > distribution of media content over the Internet that could be deployed > without creating the kind of anticompetive, inappropriately skewed and > limited frameworks that have become the center of the current > neutrality debate. The question is whether or not these topologies > can be economically and effectively deployed given the existing > warped, largely unreglated Internet telecom landscape that we must > build upon to move forward. > --Lauren-- > NNSquad Moderator > Begin forwarded message: > From: "David P. Reed" > Date: February 26, 2009 8:07:01 AM EST > To: nnsquad@nnsquad.org > Subject: [ NNSquad ] Re: New P2P Privacy System from Univ. of > Washington > Ou engages in egregious misrepresentation of the technical matters > he suggests. I question his expertise and credentials based on this > performance. I suspect his goal is FUD, since he lists a > collection of implausible, infeasible, and lunatic hypotheticals to > shift the argument to one about "values" where he can talk about > good "ends" that would justify a slippery slope toward means. > Technical comments regarding the achievability of the proposed > "motivations" hypothesized are intercalated below. Essentially, > Vint Cerf is right. If you want a memorable example: DPI can't stop > pictures of children naked being consumed by predators either. It > doesn't matter if the cause is good if the means don't achieve the > goal within acceptable policy and economic bounds! Invoking bad > things as reasons for a technically unsound and infeasible remedy > sounds like a marketing campaign in the drug industry: "Got spam? > Buy DPI! It cures all your ills, just trust George Ou". > George Ou wrote: >> DPI is good when we use it to: >> * Inspect content to detect and block virus or malware signatures >> > *Blocking* is not technically feasible, contrary to claims. In > order to block such content, one would have to buffer many > sequential packets in a flow, holding all packets in a buffer, and > only deliver packets when a unit of application data (such as an > email) is complete. While programes like driftnet and etherpeek can > sometimes copy such systems, a DPI based system that observed TCP > packets *while buffering them* would so seriously disrupt the TCP > flow control that the end system would experience disruption. As > Vint Cerf said, this can only be done by higher level protocols at > endpoints. > Detection of content that spans multiple packets is barely possible: > requires massive history and reassembly: a packet inspecting > appliance in the network is really a massively ineffective place to > do it. >> * Inspect content to detect and block denial of service payloads >> > Denial of service typically involves large numbers of packets, not > specific payloads. Packet counting based on destination is not "deep > packet inspection" - it's inspecting IP headers, which routers can > do because it's outtside the envelope. > Payloads that result in denial of service are tied very closely to > applications. Servers that are conservative on what they accept as > requests (checking length fields, validity of fields) control their > own. > Conclusion: blocking infeasible, detection possible but in the wrong > place. >> * Inspect content to detect and block spam >> > Analysis is same as viruses above, plus the important issue that > spam is marketing material, and the recipient may not want a > censorious ISP deciding that marketing of perfectly legal things via > email is "bad". Let the recipient route his/her mail through a spam > filter, where it is less costly to do the filtering than it is at > the packet level, and the filtering can be chosen by the user based > on his/her definition of "unwanted" in the official spam definition: > bulk, unwanted, commercial email. >> * Inspect content to detect replicate data to cache data so that >> unicast >> audio/video delivery scales >> > Taking end-to-end traffic streams apart after buffering them to > reassemble the entire stream, to do a "diff" to determine that the > data is the same is also infeasible. Today every kind of media is > capable of being personalized - in a web browser you don't see the > same page view that everyone else does, because the source > personalizes the data for each customer (ad insertion, if nothing > else, is done at the source server). This is also true of video > media, the dandy of "multicast" aficionados who think people watch > video live in a 1950's 3 network model. > Complex media cannot be transparently cached. Any caching that is > useful is source-controlled, using app layer assembly - which Akamai > and others support. >> * Inspect explicit DiffServ labels to properly prioritize traffic >> > Diffserv labels are not deep packet inspection. They are IP > protocol labels, and standardized independent of application. They > are on the envvelope. > Conclusion here: author doesn't understand diffserv. >> * Inspect protocol headers to determine implicit prioritization >> label in the >> absence of explicit priority labels >> > There is no technical term: "implicit prioritization label". The > idea that one can infer priority required by end user from random > inputs like port numbers is out there in the culture, but there are > no studies that show psychological intent can be inferred by reading > protocol headers. This like reading entrails. >> * Inspect content to offer targeted advertising to pay for free >> wireless >> broadband >> > Since one cannot do this in real time, it depends on an assumption: > that a single user shares the IP address, and therefore can be > understood by the stream of all packets coming from that address. > Advertisers (maybe not ISPs?) want to know people or context, not IP > addresses. Google is in a good place because one search query, > coupled with a cookie that tracks the particular personal computer > being used, provides strong targeting. The DPI approach is costly > and less targeted. Financially a weak proposition. > No clarity on how insertion might happen based on DPI. Would either > need to share information with servers (sell to Google or other ad > based companies) or do forcible insertion by changing expected > content. For example, intercepting HTTP GETs by DNS forgery and > returning other content. > Google and other app layer systems already tell their users their > policies with respect to this data, and one can choose not to use > Google. Not ttrue for ISPs. >> * Inspect content to offer targeted advertising to pay for free >> cloud email >> e.g., Gmail >> > Same as above. App services can do it better, user knows they do > it, and user chooses. >> * Inspect content to offer targeted advertising when user >> explicitly agrees >> to terms and conditions >> > User has an easy way to let this happen, as with Gmail, just buy > your content services ion the form of an server-based application, > from a vendor who adds that "feature". Technically easy, no DPI > required. >> >> DPI is bad when we use it to: >> >> * Inspect content to offer targeted advertising to users without >> disclosure >> or permission from user >> > The disclosure/permission issue is real. But the technical issues > are the same. > ------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Sun Mar 1 16:54:37 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFU00K01KULFF@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 16:54:22 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFU00K01KUGF8@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Sun, 01 Mar 2009 16:54:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFU00001ALLDF@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 13:13:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.5]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFU00NFAALL3D@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 13:12:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.38]) by b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 552F11585A for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 13:13:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42BAC790D8E for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 13:13:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by b-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7DBB16A0C for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 12:51:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (CHOKECHERRY.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.185.41]) by b-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11AE816A01 for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 12:51:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.15.9] (c-67-186-28-184.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [67.186.28.184]) (authenticated bits=0) by chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n21HoOMm028681 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 12:51:30 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 12:51:29 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] NY Times: Time to build a new Internet? from Stanford -- To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_fFE9OIkI2cGhrof8N+B/Rg)" X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.185.41 X-Listbox-UUID: 99FA74AA-0689-11DE-A3E0-CC77C1A22BEB X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: <97EDFE8F-24B3-4575-8EEC-F63CBF24FF14@stanford.edu> List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 --Boundary_(ID_fFE9OIkI2cGhrof8N+B/Rg) Content-type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Begin forwarded message: =46rom: Guru Parulkar Date: February 26, 2009 10:48:23 PM EST To: dave@farber.net Cc: "ip" Subject: NY Times: Time to build a new Internet? Dave, I am late in getting into this discussion but want to make a few = =20 observations especially in the context of our research program (Clean= =20 Slate Internet Design Program at Stanford) which was mentioned in the= =20 original NYT article. Several postings suggest two concerns (among others): o efforts aimed at reinventing or rethinking the Internet will mak= e =20 the network less open and thus compromise our ability to innovate. o research programs such as Clean Slate may require a flag day whe= n =20 you turn on the new Internet and turn off the old one which is of = =20 course very unrealistic. These concerns are not valid -- at least the way we are approaching = =20 our research program. o Yes the current Internet and its architecture allow innovations = =20 at "the end hosts" and that has been great and we must preserve this.= =20 However, if you think about the current Internet (both its =20 architecture and the physical artifact), it does not allow innovation= s =20 within the network by a third party or even its owners and users. = =20 Network equipment and the equipment vendors dictate the behavior of = =20 the network -- all the functionality is baked into this equipment (in= =20 ASICs and proprietary software) and they are closed. For example, a = =20 network operator or users have little control over how routing, =20 traffic engineering, access control, or mobility management is done = =20 within the network unless they work closely with the equipment vendor= s =20 and get their ideas supported. Moreover, the network routers and = =20 switches are getting more and more complex and represent significant = =20 barrier to innovations by anyone. Wouldn't it be nice if the Internet= =20 allowed innovations at the edges AS WELL AS within the network itself= ? o That is exactly what we are trying to do with OpenFlow -- enable= =20 innovations within the network so researchers, operators, service = =20 providers, application creators, and other stakeholders can find = =20 solutions to Internet's problems and keep making it better and better= . =20 This also means stakeholders can decide how they want to run their = =20 networks and services. OpenFlow defines a simple protocol which allow= s =20 access to and control of the flow table in a typical switch or router= =20 =66rom outside -- most switches/routers already have a flow table. A = =20 controller that manages the flow table (on behalf of the network = =20 operator, a service operator, users, or researchers) is implemented = =20 in software on a PC/server. Once you have access to the flow tables o= f =20 switches/routers of a network, you essentially have control of the = =20 network. One can create network services on top of a controller to do= =20 customized routing, access control, mobility management, and even a = =20 new protocol stack -- people can try and deploy completely new and = =20 clean slate ideas in this setting. BTW, OpenFlow hypervisor called = =20 FlowVisor allows partitioning of a flow table among multiple =20 controllers and so one can create multiple virtual networks on the = =20 physical network -- each managed by its own controller and network = =20 services on top. o OpenFlow is backward compatible with Ethernet and IP in that it = =20 uses standard TCP/IP/Ethernet protocol headers and end hosts don't = =20 need to change. Several vendors including Cisco, Juniper, HP, and NEC= =20 are starting to support the OpenFlow feature in their select products= =20 and our production network in Stanford's Gates Building is OpenFlow = =20 enabled and hardly anyone notices it. BTW, this email comes to you = =20 over an OpenFlow network. Bottom line, one can partition a production= =20 network into multiple slices or virtual networks. For example, there = =20 can be a separate slice for legacy production, experimental =20 production, and experimental traffic. And as experimental network = =20 services mature they can handle more and more production traffic = =20 seamlessly. o In 2009 we expect a few more buildings at Stanford to be OpenFlo= w =20 enabled and several other universities are getting ready to deploy = =20 OpenFlow capability into their production networks. We are also tryin= g =20 to see if we can deploy OpenFlow into research networks such as NLR = =20 and I2 (we have done it in a very limited way just for demo but not a= t =20 scale yet). o Bottom line, with OpenFlow we are making the Internet more open = =20 and enabling more innovations rather than make it closed and curb = =20 innovations. Also we are not expecting a flag day -- just the =20 opposite. One can pursue clean slate ideas and also bring about a big= =20 change in the networking substrate without requiring a flag day. o It is true that using these platforms one can explore different= =20 design choices: a network that is more secure and potentially less = =20 open or more secure and more open. We think it is perfectly ok for th= e =20 researchers to explore different design choices and different choices= =20 may make sense in different settings. Finally I want just say our program mission is to help reinvent =20 Internet infrastructure and services by creating =93platforms for = =20 innovations=94 in networking, computing, and storage and making them = =20 available to research and user communities. OpenFlow is our platform = =20 for innovations for networking. And we are following similar approach= =20 for computing and data substrates. This is also consistent with NSF = =20 research programs such GENI and FIND -- they are also seeking =20 architectures and mechanisms that would enable more innovations rathe= r =20 than less. Hope this helps and provides more context for our research program an= d =20 approach. -guru ------------------------------------------- --Boundary_(ID_fFE9OIkI2cGhrof8N+B/Rg) Content-type: text/html; charset=WINDOWS-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE

Begin for= warded message:

From: Guru Parulkar <parulka= r@stanford.edu>
Date: February 26, 2009 10:48:2= 3 PM EST
Subject: NY Times: Ti= me to build a new Internet?


Dave,

I am late in getting into this d= iscussion but want to make a few observations especially in the conte= xt of our research program (Clean Slate Internet Design Program at St= anford) which was mentioned in the original NYT article. 
<= div>
Several postings suggest two concerns (among other= s):

  o efforts aimed at rein= venting or rethinking the Internet will make the network less open an= d thus compromise our ability to innovate. 

=
  o research programs such as Clean Slate may req= uire a flag day when you turn on the new Internet and turn off the ol= d one which is of course very unrealistic. 

=
These concerns are not valid -- at least the way we are approach= ing our research program. 

  = o Yes the current Internet and its architecture allow innovation= s at "the end hosts" and that has been great and we must preserve thi= s. However, if you think about the current Internet (both its ar= chitecture and the physical artifact), it does not allow innovations = within the network by a third party or even its owners and users. Net= work equipment and the equipment vendors dictate the behavior of the = network -- all the functionality is baked into this equipment (in ASI= Cs and proprietary software) and they are closed. For example, a netw= ork operator or users have little control over how routing, traffic e= ngineering, access control, or mobility management is done within the= network unless they work closely with the equipment vendors and get = their ideas supported. Moreover, the network routers and switches are= getting more and more complex and represent significant barrier to i= nnovations by anyone. Wouldn't it be nice if the Internet allowed inn= ovations at the edges AS WELL AS within the network itself? 

  o That is exactly what we are tryin= g to do with OpenFlow -- enable innovations within the network so res= earchers, operators, service providers, application creators, and oth= er stakeholders can find solutions to Internet's problems and keep ma= king it better and better. This also means stakeholders can decide ho= w they want to run their networks and services. OpenFlow defines a si= mple protocol which allows access to and control of the flow table in= a typical switch or router from outside -- most switches/routers alr= eady have a flow table. A controller that manages the flow table (on = behalf of the network operator,  a service operator, users, or r= esearchers) is implemented in software on a PC/server. Once you have = access to the flow tables of switches/routers of a network, you essen= tially have control of the network. One can create network services o= n top of a controller to do customized routing, access control, mobil= ity management, and even a new protocol stack  -- people can try= and deploy completely new and clean slate ideas in this setting. BTW= , OpenFlow hypervisor called FlowVisor allows partitioning of a flow = table among multiple controllers and so one can create multiple virtu= al networks on the physical network -- each managed by its own contro= ller and network services on top. 

&nbs= p; o OpenFlow is backward compatible with Ethernet and IP in tha= t it uses standard TCP/IP/Ethernet protocol headers and end hosts don= 't need to change. Several vendors including Cisco, Juniper, HP, and = NEC are starting to support the OpenFlow feature in their select prod= ucts and our production network in Stanford's Gates Building is OpenF= low enabled and hardly anyone notices it. BTW, this email comes to yo= u over an OpenFlow network. Bottom line, one can partition a producti= on network into multiple slices or virtual networks. For example, the= re can be a separate slice for legacy production, experimental produc= tion, and experimental traffic. And as experimental network services = mature they can handle more and more production traffic seamlessly.&n= bsp;

  o In 2009 we expect a few m= ore buildings at Stanford to be OpenFlow enabled and several other un= iversities are getting ready to deploy OpenFlow capability into their= production networks. We are also trying to see if we can deploy Open= Flow into research networks such as NLR and I2 (we have done it in a = very limited way just for demo but not at scale yet). 

  o Bottom line, with OpenFlow we are = making the Internet more open and enabling more innovations rather th= an make it closed and curb innovations. Also we are not expectin= g a flag day -- just the opposite. One can pursue clean slate ideas a= nd also bring about a big change in the networking substrate without = requiring a flag day.

   o It= is true that using these platforms one can explore different design = choices: a network that is more secure and potentially less open or m= ore secure and more open. We think it is perfectly ok for the researc= hers to explore different design choices and different choices may ma= ke sense in different settings.

Finall= y I want just say our program mission is to help&n= bsp;reinvent Inte= rnet infrastructure and services by creating =93platforms for in= novations=94 in networking, computing, and storage and making th= em available to research and user communities. OpenFlow is our platfo= rm for innovations for networking. And we are following similar appro= ach for computing and data substrates. This is also consistent with NSF r= esearch programs such GENI and FIND -- they are also seeking architec= tures and mechanisms that would enable more innovations rather than l= ess. 

Hope this he= lps and provides more context for our research program and approach.&= nbsp;

-guru



Archives
--Boundary_(ID_fFE9OIkI2cGhrof8N+B/Rg)--   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Sun Mar 1 23:35:13 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFV003013EMS0@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 23:35:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFV003013EIRR@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Sun, 01 Mar 2009 23:35:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFU00P01MLZ7D@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 17:32:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from a-lb-ex-fastnet.listbox.com (zeppo.pobox.com [207.8.214.3]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFU00J9CMLYA2@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 17:32:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-ex-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A948F3DA for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 17:32:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by b-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE150161F7 for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 17:29:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (JACKFRUIT.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.201.16]) by b-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 659D8161F1 for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 17:29:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.15.7] (c-67-186-28-184.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [67.186.28.184]) (authenticated bits=0) by jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n21MTKbb015358 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 17:29:21 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 17:29:19 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] US Airways Flight 1549 Reconstruction (SceneSystems) To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.201.16 X-Listbox-UUID: 6E74E7EE-06B0-11DE-910A-4575C1A22BEB X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: <3C8DAD33-8644-4042-911F-DC6244063E50@saffo.com> List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 Begin forwarded message: From: Paul Saffo Date: March 1, 2009 2:35:13 PM EST To: Dave Farber Subject: US Airways Flight 1549 Reconstruction (SceneSystems) (Impressive, but their hard-sell language sorta has the feel of lawyers with "ambulance" painted backwards on the hood of their car...) http://scenesystems.com/blog/us-airways-flight-1549-animat View our Flight 1549 Hudson River plane crash reconstruction that is on display at the LegalTech New York 2009 tradeshow - and find out how we did it. Our accurate reconstruction of the Hudson River plane crash which took place on January 15, 2009 was on display at the LegalTech tradeshow from the 2nd to 4th February. Proving immensely popular, over 100 people asked us for details of how we made it. The video is now available on YouTube, Vimeo - and below. The animation took 3 days to put together, and was quite complex due to the limited amount of detailed official information about what happened and the large number of buildings. Our animators took data about the flight path from the New York Times, and further details related to timings, environment, etc., from various other news sources and eyewitness reports. The reconstruction contains digitized accurate models of the exact plane involved in the crash, and the whole Manhattan skyline. Want to know more about how we put it together, or find out how we produce cost-effective, highly flexible 3D legal animations? See our main site at www.scenesystems.com, or email us at getintouch@scenesystems.com. Interested in a broadcast-quality copy of this animation? We're happy to provide one - just drop us an email. And in case you missed it - here's the animation. http://scenesystems.com/blog/us-airways-flight-1549-animat -------------------------------------------   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Sun Mar 1 23:35:14 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFV003013EMS0@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 23:35:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFV003013EIRR@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Sun, 01 Mar 2009 23:35:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFU00301O6RHE@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 18:06:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.5]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFU0022QO6RM6@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 18:06:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from b-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (b-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.49]) by b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B84181556D for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 18:06:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by b-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACC7313A23 for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 18:06:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by b-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D607516755 for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 18:02:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (JACKFRUIT.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.201.16]) by b-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28B021674D for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 18:02:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.15.7] (c-67-186-28-184.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [67.186.28.184]) (authenticated bits=0) by jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n21N20Dt015698 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 18:02:01 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 18:02:00 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Re: Porn in the USA: Conservatives are biggest consumers To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.201.16 X-Listbox-UUID: FB0F1C70-06B4-11DE-92C4-6B41C1A22BEB X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 Begin forwarded message: From: "Brock N. Meeks" Date: March 1, 2009 1:50:27 PM EST To: , Subject: Re: [IP] Porn in the USA: Conservatives are biggest consumers Leaving the original thrust of this message aside, my foremost question was "how did the researcher obtain this data?" I've known Jim Warren for a couple of decades and I know how he values privacy, which is why I'm curious as to why Jim didn't raise the subject himself. In the New Scientist article, we read the researcher has a client that runs adult entertainment web sites and that this company provided the researcher "with roughly two years of credit card data from 2006 to 2008 that included a purchase date and each customer's postal code." Say what? I'm sure the last thing these subscribers thought their credit card info would be used for was any kind of social behavior study. Perhaps the "privacy" policies of such web sites informed subscribers that such a use of their information would be possible (I've not studied the privacy policies of such web sites, I just look at the pictures... Wait...) If say, oh, for example, the Airline industry, turned over this kind of "anonymized" credit card data to homeland security for a study of (whatever) I think Jim would be more than a bit concerned. Now, I suppose such a hypothetical sets up a comparison as to who is the more trustworthy: the adult entertainment industry, the researcher, the airline industry or Uncle Sam. I leave that debate to more informed colleagues. --Brock On 3/1/09 10:21 AM, "David Farber" wrote: > > > Begin forwarded message: > > From: Jim Warren > Date: February 28, 2009 4:27:59 PM EST > To: Dave Farber > Subject: Porn in the USA: Conservatives are biggest consumers > > From the New Scientist - http://bit.ly/ZkOq > 27 February 2009 by Ewen Callaway > > Americans may paint themselves in increasingly bright shades of red > and blue, but new research finds one thing that varies little across > the nation: the liking for online pornography. > > A new nationwide study (pdf) of anonymised credit-card receipts from a > major online adult entertainment provider finds little variation in > consumption between states. > > "When it comes to adult entertainment, it seems people are more the > same than different," says Benjamin Edelman at Harvard Business > School. > > However, there are some trends to be seen in the data. Those states > that do consume the most porn tend to be more conservative and > religious than states with lower levels of consumption, the study > finds. > > ...... -------------------------------------------   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Sun Mar 1 23:35:15 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFV003013EMS0@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 23:35:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFV003013EIRR@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Sun, 01 Mar 2009 23:35:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFU00I01WYGZX@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 21:15:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.56]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFU00I59WYG7K@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 21:15:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92CB596D8 for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 21:16:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by b-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 724BA16278 for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 21:10:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (CHOKECHERRY.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.185.41]) by b-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A27816273 for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 21:10:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.15.9] (c-67-186-28-184.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [67.186.28.184]) (authenticated bits=0) by chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n222ADFM006090 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Sun, 01 Mar 2009 21:10:14 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 21:10:13 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Kindle Text-to-Speech Battle Nonsense To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: <00589730-BCA3-413A-9B29-B9CCF14A1E56@farber.net> MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.185.41 X-Listbox-UUID: 4695DC82-06CF-11DE-9EE1-7B6CC1A22BEB X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: <20090301182346.GA19014@vortex.com> List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 I am and have been a customer of Audible for years and use them when I am walking to work or driving or (sometimes) to multi-process during email). The Kindle does not supplant it by a long shot. I sjf Begin forwarded message: From: Lauren Weinstein Date: March 1, 2009 1:23:46 PM EST To: dave@farber.net Subject: Kindle Text-to-Speech Battle Nonsense Dave, There's another aspect to this craziness that hasn't been mentioned yet here as far as I know. It is nonsensical -- at least based on current technology -- to compare the quality of a synthesized text-to-speech output to that of most professionally recorded commercial audio versions of books. Synthesized speech has gotten a lot better over the years, but in many respects is still quite reminiscent of what I was dealing with hacking the Votrax VS6 at UCLA for my "Touch Tone Unix" project several decades ago -- that is, no way you'd confuse them with real human speech the vast majority of the time for other than relatively short utterances, and the overall sound quality and intelligibility remain inferior in major ways. Would most people who buy audio books happily suffer a move by publishers to switch from professional narrations to synthesized speech? Of course not. Attempts to block the use of synthesized text readers by devices like the Kindle fly in the face of fair use, and would appear to be ripe for legislative and/or judicial remedies. --Lauren-- Lauren Weinstein lauren@vortex.com Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800 http://www.pfir.org/lauren Co-Founder, PFIR - People For Internet Responsibility - http://www.pfir.org Co-Founder, NNSquad - Network Neutrality Squad - http://www.nnsquad.org Founder, GCTIP - Global Coalition for Transparent Internet Performance - http://www.gctip.org Founder, PRIVACY Forum - http://www.vortex.com Member, ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy Lauren's Blog: http://lauren.vortex.com -------------------------------------------   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Mon Mar 2 13:04:37 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFW008014VHYO@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 13:04:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFW008014VDYD@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Mon, 02 Mar 2009 13:04:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFV00C019TCMI@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 01:53:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from a-lb-ex-fastnet.listbox.com (zeppo.pobox.com [207.8.214.3]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFV00B6K9TBM7@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 01:53:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-ex-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 098CEE03 for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 01:53:43 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by apex.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 631AB63 for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 01:52:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (CHOKECHERRY.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.185.41]) by apex.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D1C62BB7 for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 01:51:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.15.9] (c-67-186-28-184.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [67.186.28.184]) (authenticated bits=0) by chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n226pEib009554 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 01:51:20 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 01:51:14 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Re: Porn in the USA: Conservatives are biggest consumers To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.185.41 X-Listbox-UUID: A738408A-06F6-11DE-B02C-A88482624121 X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 Begin forwarded message: From: "Brock N. Meeks" Date: March 2, 2009 12:12:06 AM EST To: Jim Warren , Subject: Re: [IP] Porn in the USA: Conservatives are biggest consumers I read it right, Jim. I know it the article SAYS it was made anonymous... and you're just taking their word for it? Let's see, ah yes, the Adult Entertainment Industry are experts at info security and de-identification -- both subjects that even long time professions, such as the health care industry, struggle with today. I don't know about you, but I'm betting that the information coming from the Adult Entertainment providers wasn't gathered, scrubbed and cross- tabbed by a Warton School graduate (but I'm willing to be proven wrong, I'm just saying...) > Oh? I'd say that anyone who pays for ANYthing with a credit card is > a FOOL if the have the delusion that every detail of their purchases > aren't tracked and analyzed. Endlessly. > > And often much more intrusively than this study described! By all > sorts of operators - grocery stores, other merchants, advertisers, > banks, credit-reporting agencies, the credit-card companies > themselves, govt agencies, etc etc etc. Yeah, I get that, Jim. And I think as a society we've already "given up" on this privacy space (though, personally, I think there's still a lot of "fight" left to fight there). We've become accepting of such likely intrusions. Why? Perhaps because they are carried out in the background, used for purposes that aren't, well, shoved in our face, as it were. But when you have the adult entertainment industry suddenly funneling data to some researcher for publication and dissemination to the public at large, well, then people start to get twitchy. How about if all the pharmacies inside the nation's Wal-Mart's suddenly started giving out "anonymous" data about everyone using Viagra (wait...) ah, about everyone that is on an anti-psychotic or anti-depressant and that's turned over to a researcher -- funded by the insurance industry -- to see if "Blue States are Happier Than Red States" or whatever. I don't really care if someone siphons off my deep, dark, grocery secret that I religiously buy squeeze cheese instead of expensive Brie, but you know, no needs to know that I've watched "Air Bud" 247 times... alone. On 3/1/09 8:21 PM, "Jim Warren" wrote: > Hey Brock (and Dave) -- > > Great to hear from ya! :-) But ... > > At 1:50 PM -0500 3/1/09, Brock N. Meeks wrote: >> Leaving the original thrust of this message aside, my foremost >> question was "how did the researcher obtain this data?" >> >> I've known Jim Warren for a couple of decades and I know how he >> values >> privacy, which is why I'm curious as to why Jim didn't raise the >> subject >> himself. > > I didn't need to raise the issue. It was clearly stated in the > second sentence of the New Scientist article - http://bit.ly/ZkOq : > > "A new nationwide study [study apparently available as a PDF file] of > anonymised credit-card receipts from a major online adult > entertainment provider finds little variation in consumption between > states." > > Please note it says that the data was ANONYMISED. And as you also > note from the article, it was further generalized to only the > porn-purchasing credit-card holders' ZIP codes. > > No names. No addresses. > > This is comparable to, or even more anonymised than, publicly > available Census data! > > >> In the New Scientist article, we read the researcher has a client >> that runs >> adult entertainment web sites and that this company provided the >> researcher >> "with roughly two years of credit card data from 2006 to 2008 that >> included >> a purchase date and each customer's postal code." >> >> Say what? I'm sure the last thing these subscribers thought their >> credit >> card info would be used for was any kind of social behavior study. > > Oh? I'd say that anyone who pays for ANYthing with a credit card is > a FOOL if the have the delusion that every detail of their purchases > aren't tracked and analyzed. Endlessly. > > And often much more intrusively than this study described! By all > sorts of operators - grocery stores, other merchants, advertisers, > banks, credit-reporting agencies, the credit-card companies > themselves, govt agencies, etc etc etc. > > You want anonymous? You pay with cash. (Which is rather difficult > to do for online "services".) > > >> Perhaps the "privacy" policies of such web sites informed >> subscribers that >> such a use of their information would be possible (I've not studied >> the >> privacy policies of such web sites, I just look at the pictures... >> Wait...) > > Privacy policies for credit-card users?! Surely you jest! (E.g., > ever seen any privacy policy when you pay for groceries with a credit > card?) > > >> If say, oh, for example, the Airline industry, turned over this >> kind of >> "anonymized" credit card data to homeland security for a study of >> (whatever) I think Jim would be more than a bit concerned. > > My strong impression is that the airlines absolutely DO turn over ALL > of their flight reservation details to Homeland "Security" (and gawd > knows which other surveillance agencies!) - routinely and > automatically. Like they told the tom-cat before his operation - > it's for our own good. ;-) > > --jim -------------------------------------------   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Mon Mar 2 13:04:38 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFW008014VHYO@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 13:04:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFW008014VDYD@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Mon, 02 Mar 2009 13:04:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFV00D01A409X@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 02:00:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.56]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFV00B8SA40M7@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 02:00:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80EA796EC for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 02:00:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by apex.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E46DE44A for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 01:52:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (CHOKECHERRY.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.185.41]) by apex.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B95E6C for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 01:52:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.15.9] (c-67-186-28-184.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [67.186.28.184]) (authenticated bits=0) by chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n226pEic009554 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 01:51:50 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 01:51:50 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Re: Porn in the USA: Conservatives are biggest consumers To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.185.41 X-Listbox-UUID: B41D2F86-06F6-11DE-BBA8-E6E16517E973 X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 Begin forwarded message: From: Peter Swire Date: March 1, 2009 10:12:42 PM EST To: "dave@farber.net" Subject: RE: [IP] Re: Porn in the USA: Conservatives are biggest consumers Brock Meeks asks very good questions, which essentially boil down to this -- was the research done consistent with strong privacy protections? As Brock and many readers of this list know, there have been painful episodes where data was released for research purposes in the belief that privacy was protected. Then, the data was linked to an individual. One example was when AOL released the records of online searches, and a number of the indviduals were identified. As a more general matter, LaTanya Sweeney and others have shown that "deidentified" data can often be "reidentified." On the other hand, research is often a Good Thing. In the medical realm, research can go forward consistent with the HIPAA privacy rule in several ways -- consent by the patient, deidentification, approval by the Institutional Review Board, or subject to a data use agreement. Other privacy laws, and many privacy policies, do not have any similar path to conducting research. I think policymakers, and readers of this list, should want to accomplish the Good Thing of research and the Good Thing of privacy when possible. As a rough guide, the following should be considered: 1. Release data to researchers in truly deidentified form. That may have happened in the porn study, if the data was kept at the zip code level. (Then again, the list of credit card purchases may be like the AOL list of search terms -- some purchases or search terms are idiosyncratic enough that, combined with public records, the person can be identified.) 2. Consider creating Institutional Review Boards or the equivalent so that good practices are followed. It is true that IRBs can be a bureaucratic burden. But they also are an institutional mechanism to come up with protocols that meet good standards. 3. Consider releasing the data under data use agreements that bind the researchers. In this way, the researcher breaches a contract if names or other personal data are released outside the scope of the permitted research. Steps such as these can help us get useful research while also protecting individuals against privacy invasions they can't control. Peter Prof. Peter P. Swire C. William O'Neill Professor of Law Moritz College of Law of the Ohio State University Senior Fellow, Center for American Progress (240) 994.4142, www.peterswire.net -----Original Message----- From: David Farber [mailto:dave@farber.net] Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2009 6:02 PM To: ip Subject: [IP] Re: Porn in the USA: Conservatives are biggest consumers Begin forwarded message: From: "Brock N. Meeks" Date: March 1, 2009 1:50:27 PM EST To: , Subject: Re: [IP] Porn in the USA: Conservatives are biggest consumers Leaving the original thrust of this message aside, my foremost question was "how did the researcher obtain this data?" I've known Jim Warren for a couple of decades and I know how he values privacy, which is why I'm curious as to why Jim didn't raise the subject himself. In the New Scientist article, we read the researcher has a client that runs adult entertainment web sites and that this company provided the researcher "with roughly two years of credit card data from 2006 to 2008 that included a purchase date and each customer's postal code." Say what? I'm sure the last thing these subscribers thought their credit card info would be used for was any kind of social behavior study. Perhaps the "privacy" policies of such web sites informed subscribers that such a use of their information would be possible (I've not studied the privacy policies of such web sites, I just look at the pictures... Wait...) If say, oh, for example, the Airline industry, turned over this kind of "anonymized" credit card data to homeland security for a study of (whatever) I think Jim would be more than a bit concerned. Now, I suppose such a hypothetical sets up a comparison as to who is the more trustworthy: the adult entertainment industry, the researcher, the airline industry or Uncle Sam. I leave that debate to more informed colleagues. --Brock On 3/1/09 10:21 AM, "David Farber" wrote: > > > Begin forwarded message: > > From: Jim Warren > Date: February 28, 2009 4:27:59 PM EST > To: Dave Farber > Subject: Porn in the USA: Conservatives are biggest consumers > > From the New Scientist - http://bit.ly/ZkOq > 27 February 2009 by Ewen Callaway > > Americans may paint themselves in increasingly bright shades of red > and blue, but new research finds one thing that varies little across > the nation: the liking for online pornography. > > A new nationwide study (pdf) of anonymised credit-card receipts from a > major online adult entertainment provider finds little variation in > consumption between states. > > "When it comes to adult entertainment, it seems people are more the > same than different," says Benjamin Edelman at Harvard Business > School. > > However, there are some trends to be seen in the data. Those states > that do consume the most porn tend to be more conservative and > religious than states with lower levels of consumption, the study > finds. > > ...... ------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Mon Mar 2 13:04:39 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFW008014VHYO@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 13:04:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFW008014VDYD@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Mon, 02 Mar 2009 13:04:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFV00D01AJFWN@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 02:09:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.56]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFV00D27AJFGO@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 02:09:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D0FA958A for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 02:09:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by apex.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 720DD5F for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 01:56:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (JACKFRUIT.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.201.16]) by apex.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D2A968 for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 01:56:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.15.9] (c-67-186-28-184.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [67.186.28.184]) (authenticated bits=0) by jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n226u0Aa022651 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 01:56:00 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 01:56:00 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] SwitchWare: Accelerating Network Evolution -- 10 year cycle To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: <45281BDA-DEB9-46D8-B747-E92FD7445D4A@farber.net> MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.201.16 X-Listbox-UUID: 441A479A-06F7-11DE-ACC6-93B31AFEFBAA X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 SwitchWare: Accelerating Network Evolution (White Paper) (1996) =09=95 Smith, Jonathan M, =09=95 Farber, David J, =09=95 Gunter, Carl A, =09=95 Nettles, Scott M, =09=95 Feldmeier, D. C, =09=95 Sincoskie, W. David Abstract We propose the development of a set of software technologies =20 ("SwitchWare") which will enable rapid development and deployment of = =20 new network services. The key insight is that by making the basic = =20 network service selectable on a per user (or even per packet) basis, = =20 the need for formal standardization is eliminated. Additionally, by = =20 making the basic network service programmable, the deployment times, = =20 today constrained by capital funding limitations, are tremendously = =20 reduced (to the order of software distribution times). Finally, by = =20 constructing an advanced, robust programming environment, even the = =20 service development time can be reduced. A SwitchWare switch consists= =20 of input and output ports controlled by a software-programmable =20 element; programs are contained in sequences of messages sent to the = =20 SwitchWare switch's input ports, which interpret the messages as = =20 programs. We call these "Switchlets". This accelerates the pace of = =20 network evolution, as evolving user needs can be immediately reflecte= d =20 in the network infrastructure. Immediate reconfigurability enhances = =20 the adaptability of the network infrastructure in the face of =20 unexpected situations. We call a network built from SwitchWare =20 switches an active network. Publication details Download http://repository.upenn.edu/cis_reports/211 Publisher ScholarlyCommons@Penn Repository ScholarlyCommons@Penn (United States) Type text -------------------------------------------   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Mon Mar 2 13:04:40 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFW008014VHYO@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 13:04:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFW008014VDYD@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Mon, 02 Mar 2009 13:04:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFV00F01BPLTF@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 02:34:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from a-lb-ex-fastnet.listbox.com (zeppo.pobox.com [207.8.214.3]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFV00DD9BPLG5@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 02:34:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-ex-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00EA056C for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 02:34:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by apex.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA8CA65 for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 02:31:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (JACKFRUIT.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.201.16]) by apex.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B036E63 for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 02:30:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.15.7] (c-67-186-28-184.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [67.186.28.184]) (authenticated bits=0) by jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n227UXtf023011 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 02:30:33 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 02:30:33 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Re: Petition against Airtel "Fair Usage" Policy in India To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.201.16 X-Listbox-UUID: 14998940-06FC-11DE-97AD-E9E28462902C X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: <49AACE21.5080107@cmu.edu> List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 Begin forwarded message: From: Rahul Tongia Date: March 1, 2009 1:04:17 PM EST To: dave@farber.net Cc: ip , Rahul Tongia Subject: Re: [IP] Petition against Airtel "Fair Usage" Policy in India Reply-To: tongia@cmu.edu Hi Dave, I am writing from Bangalore...so I can speak from experience about DSL and more in India. India has some of the cheapest DSL available, with 2 catches. All of the cheap plans are limited usage, sometimes as little as 1 or 5 GB (or less!) per month. IMHO, this is a good thing, allowing $2/month DSL for the masses (in a few cases, and $4-5 in most urban locations) Second, the advertised speeds are rarely achieved. Part of this depends on where the other end of the path is (domestic vs. international). Within India, the backbones are reasonable, at least compared to the very $$$$ international bandwidth. To give a sense of how much plans vary BY USAGE, unlimited plans cost 3-5 times limited plans. The Airtel plan reduces by half the plan speed after crossing 40 GB of usage in the month. That's reasonably generous, considering most people I know have plans with some 1 or 5 GB caps, after which they keep their speed but pay 2 cents or so per MB! In comparison, free usage but at half the speed is quite reasonable. Is this an ideal world? No. Speeds should be faster, usage unlimited. But if business models dictate some compromises, the airtel cap seems reasonable. There is no discrimination by usage/port/application, so any claims this violates net neutrality is bizarre. In a land where there are power cuts daily, I am not sure what fraction of users would be impacted by 40 GB semi-caps (literally, half speed). My bet is this is going to be less than 1% of users, or even 0.1%. Let's do some math. At 512 kbps rated speed (and note, Airtel often does better than the main competitor, the ex-incumbent, govt. co. BSNL, when it comes to real speeds compared to advertised speeds), 1.3 GB per day of usage is (ignoring overhead) just under 6 hours of full throttle downloading @512 kbps per day. Given practical speeds are sometimes slower, we're talking many hours of continuous "full-usage" per day. Other than people with specific needs/applications, this just doesn't seem like an issue. Rahul ************************************************************************ Rahul Tongia, Ph.D. Senior Systems Scientist Program in Computation, Organizations, and Society (COS) School of Computer Science (ISR) / Dept. of Engineering & Public Policy Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA 15213 USA tel: 412-268-5619 fax: 412-268-2338 email: tongia@cmu.edu http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~rtongia David Farber wrote: > Begin forwarded message: > *From: *David Ian Hopper >> > *Date: *February 28, 2009 9:36:45 PM EST > *To: *dave@farber.net > *Subject: **Petition against Airtel "Fair Usage" Policy in India* > Dave, > For IP. Caps come to India. This sounds a lot like Comcast's extra > charges. Here, though, most Internet plans have a limited download > cap. The writer is up in arms because it would take the described > Unlimited 512K plan -- blazing fast, yes -- and throttle it down to > 256K if you exceed some unspecified limit. Calling this a reference > to Net Neutrality could be pandering, or some confusion on the part > of the writers. That said, the writers have a point. For a country > noted for its tech companies, Internet infrastructure is, as they > say here, "very less." > According to the following post, though, the slow-down policy has > already started: > http://www.techshout.com/internet/2009/18/airtel-broadband-users-up-in-arms-over-donwload-caps-on-unlimited-plans/ > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: *admin@broadbandforum.in * > > Date: Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 3:21 AM > Subject: Petition against Airtel Fair Usage Policy > To: imhopper@gmail.com > Hi All, > As some of you may know, Airtel is introducing / has introduced a > new policy called the "Fair Usage Policy" (details are sketchy) > that seeks to curb the amount you download using 'unlimited' > internet plans. What they are trying to get away with is saying > that people are using too much of the internet and thus they need to > curb your downloads / speeds, rather than upgrade their own > infrastructure and equipment. > In an nutshell, what it means is that if you have an unlimited plan > that is, say, 512kbps in speed, after a certain cap they will halve > your speed to 256kbps for the rest of the month, while charging you > the same amount that they have been charging you till now for > 512kbps for the whole month!!! Essentially they are giving you less > (up to 45% less) service but for the same price!!! And the cap can > be reached in as quick as 5-6 days if you are a heavy user. > While you may feel that this only affects 'heavy downloaders,' it's > an important issue for all to consider as it sets a very dangerous > precedent for telecom companies to start implementing all sorts of > policies. The day may not be very far (in fact many internet > activists around the world say it's quite near) where the ISPs will > control not only your speeds and download abilities, but will > control what information you can access, thereby completely > destroying what made the internet what it is today - a level playing > field. This is popularly known as the issue of net neutrality, > which gained considerable importance in the 2008 U.S. Presidential > elections (which hopefully and thankfully ended with the selection > of a candidate who is for net neutrality and against allowing giant > telecom companies railroad consumers in order for profit). And if > you think 'downloading' is important only for people downloading > pirated movies, music etc. I urge you to read this page, which > describes in brief the variety of legitimate applications that are > out there which would be significantly stunted with the > implementation of these policies. If you are not on Airtel, don't > worry - If Airtel implements this policy, your ISP will follow > (soon), which is why this petition is open to all. > The internet today is the single most important tool for all the > essentials of modern life - communication, education, business, > politics etc. etc., and I urge you to not take this matter lightly. > A few of us have started an online petition in protest, which we > will be sending to Mr. Sunil Bharti Mittal, Chairman & Managing > Director, Bharti Airtel Ltd. after we obtain a significant number of > signatures. You can find the petition here. Please do read the > petition as well as the other information that is on the site, make > up your own mind, and sign it if you agree with it. > http://afup.broadbandforum.in/ > Please do use a valid e-mail address (which will be kept > confidential) as you will need to confirm your signature for it to > be counted. After signing you will get an e-mail, which is highly > likely to be wrongly sent to your SPAM folder. Please check there > if it doesn't come in your inbox, and click on the link therein to > confirm your signature. > We would appreciate it if you can (BCC) forward this e-mail to > others who care about the future of the Internet in India. > Our thanks in advance. > Supporters of net neutrality in India > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------------------------------   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Mon Mar 2 13:04:41 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFW008014VHYO@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 13:04:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFW008014VDYD@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Mon, 02 Mar 2009 13:04:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFV00301U0S4P@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 09:10:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.5]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFV0023CU0SQP@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 09:10:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from b-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (b-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.49]) by b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B02611591F for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 09:10:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by b-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C82913610 for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 09:10:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD1551387F for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 09:05:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (JACKFRUIT.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.201.16]) by a-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B563B1387A for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 09:05:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from FARBERMAC.ISRI.CMU.EDU (FARBERMAC.ISRI.CMU.EDU [128.2.220.234]) (authenticated bits=0) by jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n22E56fZ027920 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 09:05:06 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 09:05:05 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] from the author -- Porn in the USA: Conservatives are biggest consumers To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.201.16 X-Listbox-UUID: 2464243E-0733-11DE-96A1-614AB4A18844 X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: <458E205CAF92624D9232F7922D5BF6D601491B1DC894@WINHBSMAIL01.hbs.edu> List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 Begin forwarded message: From: "Edelman, Benjamin" Date: March 2, 2009 8:35:54 AM EST To: "dave@farber.net" Subject: RE: [IP] Porn in the USA: Conservatives are biggest consumers Dave, I wrote the underlying paper being discussed in this thread. For anyone interested in the full paper, not just news coverage thereof, it's at http://people.hbs.edu/bedelman/papers/redlightstates.pdf . To your readers' questions about privacy protections: The data I received had very few fields -- just zip code, date of subscription, and a very little bit of information about purchase (subscription duration, whether a new subscription). No names, no email addresses, no street addresses, no credit card numbers, nothing in that vein. Brock's privacy concerns are well-taken in the abstract, and I share his general concerns. But I don't think those concerns have much bite given the limited data I received. To his question about the quality of the data-processing: My data source provided this data correctly, promptly, and just as described above. Ben Edelman -----Original Message----- From: James Grimmelmann [mailto:james.grimmelmann@gmail.com] On Behalf Of James Grimmelmann Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 8:18 AM To: Ben Edelman Subject: Fwd: [IP] Re: Porn in the USA: Conservatives are biggest consumers You might want to respond to this conversation taking place on Dave Farber's list. I read your paper to say that you got a multiset of zip codes and nothing else, but others are making some ungenerous assumptions about the privacy protections of your research methods. James Begin forwarded message: > From: David Farber > Date: March 2, 2009 1:51:50 AM EST > To: "ip" > Subject: [IP] Re: Porn in the USA: Conservatives are biggest > consumers > Reply-To: dave@farber.net > > > > Begin forwarded message: > > From: Peter Swire > Date: March 1, 2009 10:12:42 PM EST > To: "dave@farber.net" > Subject: RE: [IP] Re: Porn in the USA: Conservatives are biggest > consumers > > Brock Meeks asks very good questions, which essentially boil down to > this -- was the research done consistent with strong privacy > protections? > > As Brock and many readers of this list know, there have been painful > episodes where data was released for research purposes in the belief > that privacy was protected. Then, the data was linked to an > individual. One example was when AOL released the records of online > searches, and a number of the indviduals were identified. As a more > general matter, LaTanya Sweeney and others have shown that > "deidentified" data can often be "reidentified." > > On the other hand, research is often a Good Thing. In the medical > realm, research can go forward consistent with the HIPAA privacy > rule in several ways -- consent by the patient, deidentification, > approval by the Institutional Review Board, or subject to a data use > agreement. > > Other privacy laws, and many privacy policies, do not have any > similar path to conducting research. > > I think policymakers, and readers of this list, should want to > accomplish the Good Thing of research and the Good Thing of privacy > when possible. As a rough guide, the following should be considered: > > 1. Release data to researchers in truly deidentified form. That may > have happened in the porn study, if the data was kept at the zip > code level. (Then again, the list of credit card purchases may be > like the AOL list of search terms -- some purchases or search terms > are idiosyncratic enough that, combined with public records, the > person can be identified.) > > 2. Consider creating Institutional Review Boards or the equivalent > so that good practices are followed. It is true that IRBs can be a > bureaucratic burden. But they also are an institutional mechanism > to come up with protocols that meet good standards. > > 3. Consider releasing the data under data use agreements that bind > the researchers. In this way, the researcher breaches a contract if > names or other personal data are released outside the scope of the > permitted research. > > Steps such as these can help us get useful research while also > protecting individuals against privacy invasions they can't control. > > Peter > > Prof. Peter P. Swire > C. William O'Neill Professor of Law > Moritz College of Law of the Ohio State University > Senior Fellow, Center for American Progress > (240) 994.4142, www.peterswire.net > > > -----Original Message----- > From: David Farber [mailto:dave@farber.net] > Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2009 6:02 PM > To: ip > Subject: [IP] Re: Porn in the USA: Conservatives are biggest consumers > > > > Begin forwarded message: > > From: "Brock N. Meeks" > Date: March 1, 2009 1:50:27 PM EST > To: , > Subject: Re: [IP] Porn in the USA: Conservatives are biggest consumers > > Leaving the original thrust of this message aside, my foremost > question was "how did the researcher obtain this data?" > > I've known Jim Warren for a couple of decades and I know how he values > privacy, which is why I'm curious as to why Jim didn't raise the > subject > himself. > > In the New Scientist article, we read the researcher has a client that > runs > adult entertainment web sites and that this company provided the > researcher > "with roughly two years of credit card data from 2006 to 2008 that > included > a purchase date and each customer's postal code." > > Say what? I'm sure the last thing these subscribers thought their > credit > card info would be used for was any kind of social behavior study. > > Perhaps the "privacy" policies of such web sites informed subscribers > that > such a use of their information would be possible (I've not studied > the > privacy policies of such web sites, I just look at the pictures... > Wait...) > > If say, oh, for example, the Airline industry, turned over this kind > of > "anonymized" credit card data to homeland security for a study of > (whatever) I think Jim would be more than a bit concerned. > > Now, I suppose such a hypothetical sets up a comparison as to who is > the > more trustworthy: the adult entertainment industry, the researcher, > the > airline industry or Uncle Sam. I leave that debate to more informed > colleagues. > > --Brock > > > > > > > On 3/1/09 10:21 AM, "David Farber" wrote: > >> >> >> Begin forwarded message: >> >> From: Jim Warren >> Date: February 28, 2009 4:27:59 PM EST >> To: Dave Farber >> Subject: Porn in the USA: Conservatives are biggest consumers >> >> From the New Scientist - http://bit.ly/ZkOq >> 27 February 2009 by Ewen Callaway >> >> Americans may paint themselves in increasingly bright shades of red >> and blue, but new research finds one thing that varies little across >> the nation: the liking for online pornography. >> >> A new nationwide study (pdf) of anonymised credit-card receipts >> from a >> major online adult entertainment provider finds little variation in >> consumption between states. >> >> "When it comes to adult entertainment, it seems people are more the >> same than different," says Benjamin Edelman at Harvard Business >> School. >> >> However, there are some trends to be seen in the data. Those states >> that do consume the most porn tend to be more conservative and >> religious than states with lower levels of consumption, the study >> finds. >> >> ...... > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------- > > > > > ------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Mon Mar 2 13:04:42 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFW008014VHYO@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 13:04:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFW008014VDYD@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Mon, 02 Mar 2009 13:04:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFV00401UP0KO@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 09:24:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.5]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFV002C5UP0QP@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 09:24:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from b-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (b-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.49]) by b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A6F616F76 for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 09:24:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by b-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5514413BEC for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 09:24:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-mx-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC4D1899 for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 09:20:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (JACKFRUIT.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.201.16]) by a-lb-mx-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1EBE898 for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 09:20:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from FARBERMAC.ISRI.CMU.EDU (FARBERMAC.ISRI.CMU.EDU [128.2.220.234]) (authenticated bits=0) by jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n22EJSu2028258 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 09:20:13 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 09:20:12 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Re: from the author -- Porn in the USA: Conservatives are biggest consumers To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.201.16 X-Listbox-UUID: 407D0896-0735-11DE-B4FA-4CEFE388361A X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: <9193B239-C1FC-42B5-AAC0-0637B4FADFC3@mac.com> List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 Begin forwarded message: =46rom: Fran=E7ois Verbeek Date: March 2, 2009 9:14:43 AM EST To: dave@farber.net Cc: ip Subject: Re: [IP] from the author -- Porn in the USA: Conservatives = =20 are biggest consumers And actually, to answer an earlier email, I would rather trust the = =20 porn industry to protect privacy better than anyone because they have= =20 a real get-it-right-or-die incentive to do so, as any customer data = =20 leak from one of the porn site operators would most certainly directl= y =20 lead to the end of their business. Francois -------------------------------------------   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Mon Mar 2 13:04:43 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFW008014VHYO@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 13:04:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFW008014VDYD@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Mon, 02 Mar 2009 13:04:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFV00501UUL1R@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 09:28:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.56]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFV0044TUUL7I@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 09:27:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7646C9A78 for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 09:28:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8DA91396A for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 09:19:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (JACKFRUIT.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.201.16]) by a-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD32813961 for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 09:19:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from FARBERMAC.ISRI.CMU.EDU (FARBERMAC.ISRI.CMU.EDU [128.2.220.234]) (authenticated bits=0) by jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n22EJSu1028258 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 09:19:29 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 09:19:28 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Credit card #s plucked out of air at FL Best Buy To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: <2EB57BF9-D0CD-45D5-8652-84DE5E6B6C0A@farber.net> MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_0nBNaja7Jh7/spN70OI8dQ)" X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.201.16 X-Listbox-UUID: 26C4FF6C-0735-11DE-97EB-3276B4A18844 X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 --Boundary_(ID_0nBNaja7Jh7/spN70OI8dQ) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Begin forwarded message: From: David Ian Hopper Date: March 2, 2009 9:09:03 AM EST To: dave@farber.net Subject: Credit card #s plucked out of air at FL Best Buy For IP: Clever. Try walking into your local Best Buy with an iPhone, and see what networks you can hop on... http://www.bestbuy.com/store/550/ ----------------- The following advisory applies to customers who shopped at the Best Buy located at 1880 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd in West Palm Beach, FL in November and December 2008. An employee at Best Buy's 1880 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd in West Palm Beach, FL allegedly stole credit card information during November and December 2008 using an unauthorized personal device. Best Buy learned of the theft on Jan. 5, 2009. With the cooperation and assistance of store management, the employee was identified and taken into federal custody by the Secret Service on Jan. 7, 2009. That person is no longer employed by Best Buy. Although none of Best Buy's electronic systems were compromised by this former employee's actions, Best Buy believes that approximately 4,000 people could have been affected by this law enforcement authorities and all relevant payment card brands have been notified of the incident and Best Buy is fully cooperating with all investigations. In addition, Best Buy is sending letters to customers who may have been affected by this fraudulent activity, notifying them of the situation and encouraging them to review their account statements and monitor their credit reports. ... ------------------------------------------- --Boundary_(ID_0nBNaja7Jh7/spN70OI8dQ) Content-type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE

Begin for= warded message:

From: David Ian Hopper <imhoppe= r@gmail.com>
Date: March 2, 2009 9:09:03 AM EST<= /font>
For IP:

Clever.  Try walking into yo= ur local Best Buy with an iPhone, and see what networks you can hop o= n...


= -----------------

The following advisor= y applies to customers who shopped at the Best Buy located at 1880&nb= sp;
Palm Beach Lakes Blvd in West Palm Beach, FL in Novembe= r and December 2008. 
 
An employee at= Best Buy's 1880 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd in West Palm Beach, FL alleged= ly
stole credit card information during November and Decemb= er 2008 using an unauthorized 
personal device. Best B= uy learned of the theft on Jan. 5, 2009. With the cooperation and&nbs= p;
assistance of store management, the employee was identi= fied and taken into federal custody by 
the Secret Ser= vice on Jan. 7, 2009.  That person is no longer employed by Best= Buy. 
 
Although none of Best Buy's el= ectronic systems were compromised by this former employee's
actions, Best Buy believes that approximately 4,000 people could ha= ve been affected by this 
law enforcement authorities = and all relevant payment card brands have been notified of the <= /div>
incident and Best Buy is fully cooperating with all investi= gations.   
 
In addition, Best B= uy is sending letters to customers who may have been affected by this=  
fraudulent activity, notifying them of the situation= and encouraging them to review their account 
statem= ents and monitor their credit reports.   

...

Archives
--Boundary_(ID_0nBNaja7Jh7/spN70OI8dQ)--   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Mon Mar 2 13:04:44 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFW008014VHYO@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 13:04:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFW008014VDYD@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Mon, 02 Mar 2009 13:04:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFV00801WO9IF@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 10:07:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from a-lb-ex-fastnet.listbox.com (zeppo.pobox.com [207.8.214.3]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFV004F5WO9JN@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 10:07:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-ex-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D4C7E9A for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 10:07:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by apex.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18CFAE4DB for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 10:05:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (CHOKECHERRY.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.185.41]) by apex.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2FF2D6D0 for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 10:02:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from FARBERMAC.ISRI.CMU.EDU (FARBERMAC.ISRI.CMU.EDU [128.2.220.234]) (authenticated bits=0) by chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n22F1kNj017296 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 10:01:47 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 10:01:46 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] good read -- Porn in the USA: Conservatives are biggest consumers To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: <543EAE85-11F2-488A-A7EC-D882AD2AE474@farber.net> MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.185.41 X-Listbox-UUID: 8C3876C0-073B-11DE-9A44-AE8A2E1487F0 X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: <35186d2c0903020623q9ad64ach5cf1d3a4d077827b@mail.gmail.com> List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 From: Stewart Baker Date: Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 9:15 AM Subject: Re: [IP] Re: Porn in the USA: Conservatives are biggest consumers To: dave@farber.net Dave, Actually, for domestic flights, homeland security doesn't get travel reservation data, or any other data about travelers. The Secure Flight program, which would allow DHS to screen travelers against the no-fly list, has been delayed by at least five years by privacy advocates and Congress because they were reluctant to let DHS have access to travelers' names and birthdates. As a result, DHS has had to rely on the airlines to administer the no-fly list. Since spending money on overhead IT systems is not a high priority for the airlines, the ultimate result is that thousands, perhaps millions, of travelers have been subjected to no-fly delays because they have names (but not birthdates or other data) that overlap with a terrorist's. These people (Ted Kennedy among them) are privacy victims, inconvenienced daily by an irrational privacy restriction imposed by Congress and privacy advocates. Luckily, DHS has now finished jumping over the hurdles erected by Congress, so this inconvenience will end in the next year or so. But I'm really writing to object to the underlying assumption of the story. It's only newsworthy if the red states are somehow revealed to be hypocrites by the credit card data. That's the implied conclusion of the story: Conservatives like porn more than liberals, even though they pretend to hate it. But the anonymization by zip code makes that conclusion unsupportable. What we know is that states (or zip codes) that vote conservative seem to buy online porn at least as much as states or zip codes that vote liberal. But reliably "conservative" states may be 48% liberal, while liberal states are 52% liberal. That's a big deal in politics, a less big deal when looking at market stats; with a 4% swing in politics, many market conditions can drive statistical differences much more than political conditions. So, here are other conclusions that are just as plausible from the same data: 1. Liberals actually buy more porn than conservatives, but in liberal states, they can buy porn (for cash) by going to physical stores. In conservative states, those stores are banned or scarce, so liberals have to go on line. 2. Conservative states are less computer-savvy and thus less likely to use file-trading networks, so people pay for porn in those states rather than getting it free. 3. Conservatives buy less porn but their consciences require that they pay for it; liberals are more likely to ignore copyright restrictions, so their consumption doesn't show up in an analysis of credit card payments. I don't actually know whether any of these things are so, because the data are simply insufficient. Of course they were insufficient for the conclusions implied in the original press coverage of the topic, too. Where are all the people who usually complain when the press commits some form of innumeracy? Stewart On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 1:51 AM, David Farber wrote: > > > Begin forwarded message: > > From: Peter Swire > Date: March 1, 2009 10:12:42 PM EST > To: "dave@farber.net" > Subject: RE: [IP] Re: Porn in the USA: Conservatives are biggest > consumers > > Brock Meeks asks very good questions, which essentially boil down to > this -- > was the research done consistent with strong privacy protections? > > As Brock and many readers of this list know, there have been painful > episodes where data was released for research purposes in the belief > that > privacy was protected. Then, the data was linked to an individual. > One > example was when AOL released the records of online searches, and a > number > of the indviduals were identified. As a more general matter, LaTanya > Sweeney and others have shown that "deidentified" data can often be > "reidentified." > > On the other hand, research is often a Good Thing. In the medical > realm, > research can go forward consistent with the HIPAA privacy rule in > several > ways -- consent by the patient, deidentification, approval by the > Institutional Review Board, or subject to a data use agreement. > > Other privacy laws, and many privacy policies, do not have any > similar path > to conducting research. > > I think policymakers, and readers of this list, should want to > accomplish > the Good Thing of research and the Good Thing of privacy when > possible. As > a rough guide, the following should be considered: > > 1. Release data to researchers in truly deidentified form. That may > have > happened in the porn study, if the data was kept at the zip code > level. > (Then again, the list of credit card purchases may be like the AOL > list of > search terms -- some purchases or search terms are idiosyncratic > enough > that, combined with public records, the person can be identified.) > > 2. Consider creating Institutional Review Boards or the equivalent > so that > good practices are followed. It is true that IRBs can be a > bureaucratic > burden. But they also are an institutional mechanism to come up with > protocols that meet good standards. > > 3. Consider releasing the data under data use agreements that bind the > researchers. In this way, the researcher breaches a contract if > names or > other personal data are released outside the scope of the permitted > research. > > Steps such as these can help us get useful research while also > protecting > individuals against privacy invasions they can't control. > > Peter > > Prof. Peter P. Swire > C. William O'Neill Professor of Law > Moritz College of Law of the Ohio State University > Senior Fellow, Center for American Progress > (240) 994.4142, www.peterswire.net > > > -----Original Message----- > From: David Farber [mailto:dave@farber.net] > Sent: Sunday, March 01, 2009 6:02 PM > To: ip > Subject: [IP] Re: Porn in the USA: Conservatives are biggest consumers > > > > Begin forwarded message: > > From: "Brock N. Meeks" > Date: March 1, 2009 1:50:27 PM EST > To: , > Subject: Re: [IP] Porn in the USA: Conservatives are biggest consumers > > Leaving the original thrust of this message aside, my foremost > question was "how did the researcher obtain this data?" > > I've known Jim Warren for a couple of decades and I know how he values > privacy, which is why I'm curious as to why Jim didn't raise the > subject > himself. > > In the New Scientist article, we read the researcher has a client that > runs > adult entertainment web sites and that this company provided the > researcher > "with roughly two years of credit card data from 2006 to 2008 that > included > a purchase date and each customer's postal code." > > Say what? I'm sure the last thing these subscribers thought their > credit > card info would be used for was any kind of social behavior study. > > Perhaps the "privacy" policies of such web sites informed subscribers > that > such a use of their information would be possible (I've not studied > the > privacy policies of such web sites, I just look at the pictures... > Wait...) > > If say, oh, for example, the Airline industry, turned over this kind > of > "anonymized" credit card data to homeland security for a study of > (whatever) I think Jim would be more than a bit concerned. > > Now, I suppose such a hypothetical sets up a comparison as to who is > the > more trustworthy: the adult entertainment industry, the researcher, > the > airline industry or Uncle Sam. I leave that debate to more informed > colleagues. > > --Brock > > > > > > > On 3/1/09 10:21 AM, "David Farber" wrote: > >> >> >> Begin forwarded message: >> >> From: Jim Warren >> Date: February 28, 2009 4:27:59 PM EST >> To: Dave Farber >> Subject: Porn in the USA: Conservatives are biggest consumers >> >> From the New Scientist - http://bit.ly/ZkOq >> 27 February 2009 by Ewen Callaway >> >> Americans may paint themselves in increasingly bright shades of red >> and blue, but new research finds one thing that varies little across >> the nation: the liking for online pornography. >> >> A new nationwide study (pdf) of anonymised credit-card receipts >> from a >> major online adult entertainment provider finds little variation in >> consumption between states. >> >> "When it comes to adult entertainment, it seems people are more the >> same than different," says Benjamin Edelman at Harvard Business >> School. >> >> However, there are some trends to be seen in the data. Those states >> that do consume the most porn tend to be more conservative and >> religious than states with lower levels of consumption, the study >> finds. >> >> ...... > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------- > > > > > ------------------------------------------- > -- Stewart Baker 202-641-8670 -- Stewart Baker 202-641-8670 -------------------------------------------   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Mon Mar 2 13:04:45 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFW008014VHYO@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 13:04:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFW008014VDYD@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Mon, 02 Mar 2009 13:04:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFV00F01YOIO1@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 10:50:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.5]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFV00DC6YOIJX@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 10:50:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.38]) by b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08CDF159DA for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 10:50:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE5EA7AB9A5 for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 10:50:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by b-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9C1117ED3 for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 10:41:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (JACKFRUIT.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.201.16]) by b-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 970BE17EC3 for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 10:41:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from FARBERMAC.ISRI.CMU.EDU (FARBERMAC.ISRI.CMU.EDU [128.2.220.234]) (authenticated bits=0) by jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n22FeJWn001825 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 10:41:10 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 10:41:09 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Re: Credit card #s plucked out of air at FL Best Buy To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: <46BBA31F-5E00-45BF-B917-3013A9F98475@farber.net> MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_aBJx9wk2XqBqtkQvliIOAQ)" X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.201.16 X-Listbox-UUID: 91236924-0740-11DE-861E-1DA6C1A22BEB X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: <00b501c99b4d$2380cb00$6a826100$@frankston.com> List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 --Boundary_(ID_aBJx9wk2XqBqtkQvliIOAQ) Content-type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Begin forwarded message: =46rom: "Bob Frankston" Date: March 2, 2009 10:39:53 AM EST To: , "'ip'" Subject: RE: [IP] Credit card #s plucked out of air at FL Best Buy What does =93plucked out of the air mean=94 if the data is encrypted?= =20 Having a number of =93networks you can hop on=94 is antithetical to t= he =20 idea of the Internet as a large commons. Shouldn=92t the data protect= ion =20 techniques be independent of the =93network=94 and rely less on prote= cting =20 the perimeter than protecting the information? Of course we also have this misframing of the issue as =93identity= =94 vs =20 =93authorization heuristics=94. Given the large numbers we=92ve seen = with =20 these thefts I have to wonder about the lack of reports of =20 consequences. But then the credit card companies still do things like= =20 give all cards on an account the same number which makes tracing = =20 events unnecessarily difficult. If they couldn=92t foist the cost of = =20 their sloppiness on the users then we might see some better practices= =20 =96 if there really is a deep problem. Part of my Master=92s thesis was about mechanisms for dealing with lo= ts =20 of small transactions =96 even if the credit card companies honor = =20 suspect transactions they should help the users detect anomalies by = =20 flagging them in the statement and that statement should be emailed. = =20 Of course all the statements should be provided in a simple machine = =20 readable format such as XML with full information plus heuristics to = =20 flag suspicious transactions so one can focus attention instead of = =20 growing numb reading through each $1.39 purchase. Don=92t be surprised that these companies are interested in money and= =20 the gaming of rates and rules is probably far more consequential than= =20 these events. =46rom: David Farber [mailto:dave@farber.net] Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 09:19 To: ip Subject: [IP] Credit card #s plucked out of air at FL Best Buy Begin forwarded message: =46rom: David Ian Hopper Date: March 2, 2009 9:09:03 AM EST To: dave@farber.net Subject: Credit card #s plucked out of air at FL Best Buy For IP: Clever. Try walking into your local Best Buy with an iPhone, and see= =20 what networks you can hop on... http://www.bestbuy.com/store/550/ ----------------- The following advisory applies to customers who shopped at the Best = =20 Buy located at 1880 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd in West Palm Beach, FL in November and December= =20 2008. An employee at Best Buy's 1880 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd in West Palm = =20 Beach, FL allegedly stole credit card information during November and December 2008 using= =20 an unauthorized personal device. Best Buy learned of the theft on Jan. 5, 2009. With = =20 the cooperation and assistance of store management, the employee was identified and taken= =20 into federal custody by the Secret Service on Jan. 7, 2009. That person is no longer employe= d =20 by Best Buy. Although none of Best Buy's electronic systems were compromised by = =20 this former employee's actions, Best Buy believes that approximately 4,000 people could have= =20 been affected by this law enforcement authorities and all relevant payment card brands have= =20 been notified of the incident and Best Buy is fully cooperating with all investigations. In addition, Best Buy is sending letters to customers who may have = =20 been affected by this fraudulent activity, notifying them of the situation and encouraging = =20 them to review their account statements and monitor their credit reports. =2E.. Archives =09 ------------------------------------------- --Boundary_(ID_aBJx9wk2XqBqtkQvliIOAQ) Content-type: multipart/related; boundary="Boundary_(ID_cWPIXlmQjbIAL9Bes0G97w)"; type="text/html" --Boundary_(ID_cWPIXlmQjbIAL9Bes0G97w) Content-type: text/html; charset=WINDOWS-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE

Begin for= warded message:

From: "Bob Frankston" <Bob19-0501@bobf.frankston.com>
Date: March 2, 2= 009 10:39:53 AM EST
Subject: RE: [= IP] Credit card #s plucked out of air at FL Best Buy
=

What does =93plucked out of the air mean=94 if = the data is encrypted? Having a number of =93networks you can hop on= =94 is antithetical to the idea of the Internet as a large commons. S= houldn=92t the data protection techniques be independent of the =93ne= twork=94 and rely less on protecting the perimeter than protecting th= e information?
 
Of course we also have this misframing of the issue as =93identi= ty=94 vs =93authorization heuristics=94. Given the large numbers we= =92ve seen with these thefts I have to wonder about the lack of repor= ts of consequences. But then the credit card companies still do thing= s like give all cards on an account the same number which makes traci= ng events unnecessarily difficult. If they couldn=92t foist the cost = of their sloppiness on the users then we might see some better practi= ces =96 if there really is a deep problem.
=  
Part of my Master=92s thesis was abo= ut mechanisms for dealing with lots of small transactions =96 even if= the credit card companies honor suspect transactions they should hel= p the users detect anomalies by flagging them in the statement and th= at statement should be emailed. Of course all the statements should b= e provided in a simple machine readable format such as XML with full = information plus heuristics to flag suspicious transactions so one ca= n focus attention instead of growing numb reading through each $1.39 = purchase.
 
= Don=92t be surprised that these companies are interested in money and= the gaming of rates and rules is probably far more consequential tha= n these events.
 
 
=
From:&nb= sp;David Farber [mailto:dave@farber.net]=  
Sent: Monday, March 02, 20= 09 09:19
To: ip
Subject: = [IP] Credit card #s plucked out of air at FL Best Buy
 
 
 
Begin forwarded message:
 
From: <= /b>imhopper@gmail.com= >
 March 2, 2009 9:09:03 AM EST
To:&nb= sp;dave@farber.net
Subject: Credit card= #s plucked out of air at FL Best Buy
 
 
<= /div>
Clever.  Try walking into your local Best= Buy with an iPhone, and see what networks you can hop on...
 
=
Archives <= o:p>

Archives
--Boundary_(ID_cWPIXlmQjbIAL9Bes0G97w) Content-id: <2EEA9B25-0325-4AFF-A3CD-9E5F3B742CE7> Content-type: image/jpeg; x-unix-mode=0666; name=feed-icon-10x10.jpg Content-transfer-encoding: BASE64 Content-disposition: inline; filename=feed-icon-10x10.jpg /9j/4AAQSkZJRgABAQEARwBHAAD/2wBDAAYEBAQFBAYFBQYJBgUGCQsIBgYICwwK CgsKCgwQDAwMDAwMEAwODxAPDgwTExQUExMcGxsbHCAgICAgICAgICD/2wBDAQcH Bw0MDRgQEBgaFREVGiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICD/wAARCAAKAAoDAREAAhEBAxEB/8QAFgABAQEAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAABgAH/8QAIRAAAgEEAgIDAAAAAAAAAAAAAQIDBAUREgAhBiIxMkH/xAAX AQADAQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABQYE/8QAJBEAAQQBAwMFAAAAAAAAAAAAAQIDESEA BDFBEnGBEzJRYbH/2gAMAwEAAhEDEQA/ANZttioqi0QtUJpVzfWpOyuWkk0V29mW RDIwUnAIzyUb06XWxO558xO9iaOxGVLupUhwx7Rx47UYvkHCRv1dETEZpEKeum7D GOsYz+cwy4Kk19409BBuBl5AStXOqnVVkdVA6AAb4HBVLMfJ/cNPaB2xXabTapLV RySUcDu8EbMzRoSSUGSTjjtppPSKG2Jn31hZs7nnP//Z --Boundary_(ID_cWPIXlmQjbIAL9Bes0G97w)-- --Boundary_(ID_aBJx9wk2XqBqtkQvliIOAQ)--   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Mon Mar 2 13:04:47 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFW008014VHYO@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 13:04:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFW008014VDYD@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Mon, 02 Mar 2009 13:04:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFW00O011WMKM@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 12:07:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.5]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFW00M67242VR@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 12:04:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.38]) by b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFDD616AA1 for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 12:04:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D30D57B20B3 for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 12:04:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-mx-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BAEAECD for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 11:48:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (JACKFRUIT.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.201.16]) by a-lb-mx-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6208DECB for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 11:48:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from FARBERMAC.ISRI.CMU.EDU (FARBERMAC.ISRI.CMU.EDU [128.2.220.234]) (authenticated bits=0) by jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n22GmZfq004728 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 11:48:35 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 11:48:34 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Re: good read -- Porn in the USA: Conservatives are biggest consumers To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: <2179C186-8C21-47B4-B37B-21EC8CB18E25@farber.net> MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.201.16 X-Listbox-UUID: FB4F6312-0749-11DE-ABD5-D5FFE388361A X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: <20090302163825.GA13830@vortex.com> List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 Begin forwarded message: From: Lauren Weinstein Date: March 2, 2009 11:38:25 AM EST To: David Farber Subject: Re: [IP] good read -- Porn in the USA: Conservatives are biggest consumers > 2. Conservative states are less computer-savvy and thus less likely > to use file-trading networks, so people pay for porn in those states > rather than getting it free. > 3. Conservatives buy less porn but their consciences require that > they pay for it; liberals are more likely to ignore copyright > restrictions, so their consumption doesn't show up in an analysis of > credit card payments. Dave, I would agree that it's difficult to draw any, uh, firm conclusions about overall porn consumption based on purchase patterns at this stage. There are such vast quantities of generally legal free porn (ranging from amateur to professional) on the Net -- available on ordinary Web sites without file trading -- that the porn industry per se has been suffering a significant downturn. This is not a matter of small notice even to mainstream media here in the West San Fernando Valley, the acknowledged porn production and distribution center of the U.S., if not the world. It's been traditionally very common out here to have neighbors at home or the office who are somehow affiliated with the porn industry, in front of or behind the cameras. And in fact, most of the time these folks seem completely average -- with some notable exceptions. Ah, good ol' L.A. Anyhow, the point is that porn *purchases* now would appear to be more in "specialty" categories from die-hard fans of particular genres. It's unclear to me how well this scales to overall interest in porn. --Lauren-- Lauren Weinstein lauren@vortex.com Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800 http://www.pfir.org/lauren Co-Founder, PFIR - People For Internet Responsibility - http://www.pfir.org Co-Founder, NNSquad - Network Neutrality Squad - http://www.nnsquad.org Founder, GCTIP - Global Coalition for Transparent Internet Performance - http://www.gctip.org Founder, PRIVACY Forum - http://www.vortex.com Member, ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy Lauren's Blog: http://lauren.vortex.com -------------------------------------------   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Mon Mar 2 21:18:23 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFW00601RQIRI@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 21:18:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFW00601RQEQW@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Mon, 02 Mar 2009 21:18:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFW00I01JMG0G@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 18:23:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.56]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFW00EB0JMGZU@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 18:23:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51A7193C0 for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 18:23:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-mx-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 386C8DD4 for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 18:16:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (JACKFRUIT.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.201.16]) by a-lb-mx-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 249B4DD3 for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 18:16:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.1.101] (c-67-186-56-173.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [67.186.56.173]) (authenticated bits=0) by jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n22NGX7b018314 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 02 Mar 2009 18:16:34 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 18:16:36 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Court sets standard for online anonymity protections To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: <49EE658A-67E5-4758-A166-309C43D78CBE@farber.net> MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_uFH+HBmjaI1HKD9tVQ6ZcA)" X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.201.16 X-Listbox-UUID: 2E12CA6A-0780-11DE-95A2-9404E488361A X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 --Boundary_(ID_uFH+HBmjaI1HKD9tVQ6ZcA) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Begin forwarded message: From: No-Name Date: March 2, 2009 1:38:37 PM EST To: dave@farber.net Subject: Court sets standard for online anonymity protections Court sets standard for online anonymity protections Web sites involved in defamation suits are not required to immediately hand over the identities of readers who leave anonymous comments, a Maryland court has ruled, laying out guidelines for future suits involving online anonymity. The Maryland Court of Appeals on Friday overturned (PDF) an earlier ruling that would have forced Independent Newspapers, which runs the online forum NewsZap.com, to turn over the names of three unknown Internet posters who posted negative remarks regarding the cleanliness of a Dunkin' Donuts in Centreville, Maryland. The owner of the Dunkin' Donuts, Zebulon J. Brodie, claimed the anonymous posters defamed his store. The appeals court decided Brodie was not entitled to learn the identities of the posters because in his complaint he misidentified the forum participants responsible for the critical comments. The court used its ruling to set for trial courts a "standard that should be applied to balance the First Amendment right to anonymous speech on the Internet with the opportunity on the part of the object of that speech to seek judicial redress for alleged defamation." In a defamation case involving anonymous speakers, the ruling said, courts should first require the plaintiff to try to notify the anonymous posters that they are the subject of a subpoena. That notification could come in the form of a message posted to the online forum in question, and the posters must be given sufficient time to respond. The plaintiff must then hand over the exact statements in question, so the court can decide whether the comments are obviously defamatory. Finally, the ruling says, the court must weigh the anonymous poster's right to free speech against the strength of the defamation case and the necessity of disclosing the poster's identity. ------------------------------------------- --Boundary_(ID_uFH+HBmjaI1HKD9tVQ6ZcA) Content-type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE

Begin for= warded message:

Date: March 2, 2009 1:38:37 PM EST<= /div>
Su= bject: Court sets standard for online anonymity protect= ions

Court sets stand= ard for online anonymity protections



Web sites inv= olved in defamation suits are not required to immediately hand over t= he identities of readers who leave anonymous comments, a Maryland cou= rt has ruled, laying out guidelines for future suits involving online= anonymity.

The Maryland Court of Appeals on Friday overturne= d (PDF) an earlier ruling that would have forced Independent Newspape= rs, which runs the online forum NewsZap.com, to turn over the names o= f three unknown Internet posters who posted negative remarks regardin= g the cleanliness of a Dunkin' Donuts in Centreville, Maryland. The o= wner of the Dunkin' Donuts, Zebulon J. Brodie, claimed the anonymous = posters defamed his store.

The appeals court decided Brodie w= as not entitled to learn the identities of the posters because in his= complaint he misidentified the forum participants responsible for th= e critical comments.

The court used its ruling to set for tria= l courts a "standard that should be applied to balance the First Amen= dment right to anonymous speech on the Internet with the opportunity = on the part of the object of that speech to seek judicial redress for= alleged defamation."

In a defamation case involving anonymou= s speakers, the ruling said, courts should first require the plaintif= f to try to notify the anonymous posters that they are the subject of= a subpoena. That notification could come in the form of a message po= sted to the online forum in question, and the posters must be given s= ufficient time to respond.

The plaintiff must then hand over = the exact statements in question, so the court can decide whether the= comments are obviously defamatory. Finally, the ruling says, the cou= rt must weigh the anonymous poster's right to free speech against the= strength of the defamation case and the necessity of disclosing the = poster's identity.



Archives
--Boundary_(ID_uFH+HBmjaI1HKD9tVQ6ZcA)--   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Tue Mar 3 08:01:25 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFX00501LI9GV@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 08:01:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFX00501LI3GQ@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Tue, 03 Mar 2009 08:01:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFX00A01BAOGA@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 04:20:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.56]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFX0093IBAOLM@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 04:20:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FD059F4D for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 04:21:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by b-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 511F6170DF for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 04:08:44 -0500 (EST) Received: from chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (CHOKECHERRY.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.185.41]) by b-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10AB9170C9 for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 04:08:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from c-71-206-239-18.hsd1.pa.comcast.net (c-71-206-239-18.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [71.206.239.18]) (authenticated bits=0) by chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n2398aG6016863 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 04:08:37 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2009 04:08:36 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Govt refuses to disclose .gov domain names To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: <624E0DC2-597D-4287-BAE4-4AD8C8D9A585@farber.net> MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_TuRTui0yjdT779X38VDSZQ)" X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.185.41 X-Listbox-UUID: E4963CA2-07D2-11DE-AEBC-ECA0C1A22BEB X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: <1D398B333B50134E88969FBCF6E213D624EEAE7A3E@CMPSFCCR1.CMP.LOCAL> List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 --Boundary_(ID_TuRTui0yjdT779X38VDSZQ) Content-type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Begin forwarded message: =46rom: Tom Claburn Date: March 2, 2009 7:27:37 PM EST To: "dave@farber.net" Subject: Govt refuses to disclose .gov domain names For IP, if you wish... The General Services Administration has made the rather surprising = =20 claim that it can=92t reveal the list of .gov domains because doing s= o =20 would represent a security risk: http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=3D215= 600330 Thomas Claburn Editor-at-Large InformationWeek 600 Harrison St., 6th Floor San Francisco, CA 94107 (415) 947-6820 http://www.informationweek.com ------------------------------------------- --Boundary_(ID_TuRTui0yjdT779X38VDSZQ) Content-type: text/html; charset=WINDOWS-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
<= span class=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"border-collapse: separate; c= olor: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-sty= le: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing= : normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: auto; text-ind= ent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-= spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-= vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -web= kit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; ">
 
The General Services Administration has made the rather= surprising claim that it can=92t reveal the list of .gov domains bec= ause doing so would represent a security risk:
 
<= div style=3D"margin-top: 0in; margin-right: 0in; margin-bottom: 0.000= 1pt; margin-left: 0in; font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman= ', serif; ">http://www.informationweek.com/= news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=3D215600330
 
 <= /div>
Thomas Claburn
Editor-at-Large<= /o:p>
InformationWee= k
600 Har= rison St., 6th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94107
(415) 947-6820
 
 
 
<= br>
Archives
--Boundary_(ID_TuRTui0yjdT779X38VDSZQ)--   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Tue Mar 3 08:01:26 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFX00501LI9GV@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 08:01:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFX00501LI3GQ@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Tue, 03 Mar 2009 08:01:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFX00D01D8NN4@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 05:03:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from a-lb-ex-fastnet.listbox.com (zeppo.pobox.com [207.8.214.3]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFX0097ND9NLM@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 05:03:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-ex-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93AA2AE0 for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 05:03:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by apex.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0798D63 for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 05:01:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (JACKFRUIT.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.201.16]) by apex.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2A11E479 for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 05:00:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from c-71-206-239-18.hsd1.pa.comcast.net (c-71-206-239-18.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [71.206.239.18]) (authenticated bits=0) by jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n239xka5028678 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 05:00:01 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2009 05:00:01 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Re: Wait, Wait... The Kindle Swindle? To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: <75620B3C-B317-46CD-BCC6-9479729E827B@farber.net> MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.201.16 X-Listbox-UUID: 4D56DD6C-07DA-11DE-940F-86B2A1BD2CCB X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: <49ACD1A8.60602@treebeard.net> List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 Begin forwarded message: From: ben guthrie Date: March 3, 2009 1:43:52 AM EST To: dave@farber.net Subject: [IP] Re: Wait, Wait... The Kindle Swindle? David Farber wrote: > > > Begin forwarded message: > > From: "Glenn S. Tenney" > Date: February 28, 2009 2:40:37 PM EST > To: David Farber > Subject: Re: Wait, Wait... The Kindle Swindle? > > An update for the IP if you wish... > > This doesn't bode well for anyone who has vision problems but is > otherwise able to use a Kindle. > > -- > Glenn Tenney CISSP CISM > Specifically, the visually impaired who use JAWS to read text for them. I have a blind friend. I often cut and paste newspaper and magazine pieces and email them to her so she can "read" them with JAWS. I've even gone so far as to scan and interpret items for her. I guess that puts me in league with pirate bay. ben guthrie -------------------------------------------   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Tue Mar 3 08:01:27 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFX00501LI9GV@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 08:01:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFX00501LI3GQ@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Tue, 03 Mar 2009 08:01:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFX00E01DITRV@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 05:08:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.5]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFX00E0LDISLJ@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 05:08:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.38]) by b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C425316343 for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 05:09:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD6077DE358 for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 05:09:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-mx-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D92E479 for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 05:00:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (JACKFRUIT.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.201.16]) by a-lb-mx-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40C1E478 for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 05:00:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from c-71-206-239-18.hsd1.pa.comcast.net (c-71-206-239-18.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [71.206.239.18]) (authenticated bits=0) by jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n239xka6028678 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 05:00:48 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2009 05:00:48 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Re: Court sets standard for online anonymity protections To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: <6E008516-60C7-4AB2-AEB3-FA8CC1FF240E@farber.net> MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.201.16 X-Listbox-UUID: 2DE1E594-07DA-11DE-A9E3-133FE488361A X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 Begin forwarded message: From: Jim Warren Date: March 2, 2009 8:19:47 PM EST To: dave@farber.net Cc: labmanager@gmail.com Subject: Re: [IP] Court sets standard for online anonymity protections > From: No-Name > > Web sites involved in defamation suits are not required to > immediately hand over the identities of readers who leave anonymous > comments ... I think (I HOPE!) that this concerned the identities of writers; not of the "readers". (However, is it noteworthy that various law enforcers - foreign adn domestic - have demanded that librarians provide information about which readers check-out various publications, as well as demanding identities of everyone who views or downloads various content that is prohibited - somewhere.) Irregardless, please note that - if (when!) laws DO force disclosure of each author of each writing posted online, then web-sites will have to remove The Federalist Papers, considered the third-most important legal document in the nation, after the Constitution and Declaration of Independence! The writers of those crucial public debates (including the Anti- Federalist Papers) did so anonymously, with strong justification at the time. The authorship of those individual papers was never confirmed by their writers, although most identities were later alleged by various third parties and historians, long after the fact, including by modern researchers who used statistical analyses of the writing patterns. (Will we next have guilt by statistical probability?) --jim -------------------------------------------   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Tue Mar 3 08:01:28 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFX00501LI9GV@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 08:01:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFX00501LI3GQ@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Tue, 03 Mar 2009 08:01:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFX00F01DMAIF@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 05:10:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.56]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFX00E1ZDMALJ@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 05:10:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F04D9110 for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 05:11:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by b-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 507E4175AA for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 04:59:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (JACKFRUIT.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.201.16]) by b-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D29F1175A6 for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 04:59:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from c-71-206-239-18.hsd1.pa.comcast.net (c-71-206-239-18.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [71.206.239.18]) (authenticated bits=0) by jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n239xka4028678 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 04:59:47 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2009 04:59:46 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Re: Govt refuses to disclose .gov domain names To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: <780A3151-58CD-4158-B0EB-8DC6CE013E04@farber.net> MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.201.16 X-Listbox-UUID: 094C0476-07DA-11DE-9788-E594C1A22BEB X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 Begin forwarded message: =46rom: "Yiorgos [George] Adamopoulos" Date: March 3, 2009 4:39:17 AM EST To: David Farber Cc: ip Subject: Re: [IP] Govt refuses to disclose .gov domain names On Tue, 3 Mar 2009, David Farber wrote: > The General Services Administration has made the rather surprising = =20 > claim that it can=92t reveal the list of .gov domains because doing= so =20 > would represent a security risk: > > http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID= =3D215600330 Interestingly engough I made a similar request to the .GR Hostmaster = =20 for a list of .GR domain names, back in 2007. The response that I go= t =20 was that it was prohibited by their security policy. What I can only speculate is, that given a list of domains, one can = =20 easily create fairly accurate spam lists and spam all of them. =20 Depending the organization this may or may not seem like a reasonable= =20 precaution. --=20 #include -------------------------------------------   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Tue Mar 3 13:20:36 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFY00D010A3NB@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 13:20:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFY00D0109ZMU@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Tue, 03 Mar 2009 13:20:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFX00A01O75AL@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 08:59:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.5]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFX006QKO74OM@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 08:59:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from b-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (b-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.49]) by b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F21C16E7F for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 08:59:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by b-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8122914756 for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 08:59:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4547113657 for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 08:54:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (JACKFRUIT.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.201.16]) by a-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DCF81364E for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 08:54:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from FARBERMAC.ISRI.CMU.EDU (FARBERMAC.ISRI.CMU.EDU [128.2.220.234]) (authenticated bits=0) by jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n23DruaM001885 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 08:54:20 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2009 08:54:20 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Re: Govt refuses to disclose .gov domain names To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: <81E6F97F-FEC1-4C59-AAF9-066BB8B77D39@farber.net> MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_TKIsMDD9exJ+MOfJGDgXfA)" X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.201.16 X-Listbox-UUID: CE1569D0-07FA-11DE-B6FF-9F0DB4A18844 X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: <90423D42-C675-4E74-8461-8A60197FF484@shinkuro.com> List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 --Boundary_(ID_TKIsMDD9exJ+MOfJGDgXfA) Content-type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Begin forwarded message: =46rom: Steve Crocker Date: March 3, 2009 8:42:35 AM EST To: dave@farber.net Cc: Steve Crocker , "ip" Subject: Re: [IP] Re: Govt refuses to disclose .gov domain names [Resending with small typo fixed] Dave, et al, When DNS was designed many years ago, there was no concern about = =20 disclosure of names within a subdomain. Over a long period of time, = a =20 large portion of the community has come to consider this sensitive = =20 information. I won't argue the merits here. I am simply reporting a= =20 very clear shift in thinking that's taken place over a period of = =20 perhaps two decades. In many countries, the top level domain =20 operators cite privacy laws as their reason for not disclosing the = =20 domain names. In the original design of DNSSEC, the security protocol for DNS, a = =20 side effect of the mechanism (NSEC) within the design that provides a= n =20 authenticated declaration that a requested subdomain does not exist i= s =20 an ability to walk the zone efficiently and learn the names of all th= e =20 subdomains that do exist. This side effect was deemed unacceptable i= n =20 many quarters, leading to resistance to adopt DNSSEC and an additiona= l =20 round of design to create an alternative mechanism (NSEC3) to provide= =20 authenticated declaration of non-existence of a subdomain without = =20 disclosing the names of the existing neighbors of the requested name.= =20 Adding this additional mechanism has added a couple of years to the = =20 deployment of DNSSEC. Your readers may choose to debate whether disclosure of subdomain = =20 names is or is not a security or privacy threat in general, or whethe= r =20 the U.S. Government should choose to disclose the subdomain names = =20 under .gov. I am not addressing either of those questions here. = =20 What I am saying, however, is that this is not a new question, a larg= e =20 number of zone operators have spoken forcefully on this subject, and,= =20 to the surprise of the community that developed the DNS security = =20 protocol, the requirement to keep the zone contents private emerged = =20 late in the process and had to be accommodated. All attempts to argu= e =20 that this emergent requirement wasn't really needed -- and there were= =20 many -- failed. For what it's worth, the .gov policy is the same as = =20 many European countries' policy and others around the world. Steve On Mar 3, 2009, at 3:59 AM, David Farber wrote: > > > Begin forwarded message: > > From: "Yiorgos [George] Adamopoulos" > Date: March 3, 2009 4:39:17 AM EST > To: David Farber > Cc: ip > Subject: Re: [IP] Govt refuses to disclose .gov domain names > > On Tue, 3 Mar 2009, David Farber wrote: >> The General Services Administration has made the rather surprising= =20 >> claim that it can=92t reveal the list of .gov domains because doin= g =20 >> so would represent a security risk: >> >> http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID= =3D215600330 > > Interestingly engough I made a similar request to the .GR Hostmaste= r =20 > for a list of .GR domain names, back in 2007. The response that I = =20 > got was that it was prohibited by their security policy. > > What I can only speculate is, that given a list of domains, one can= =20 > easily create fairly accurate spam lists and spam all of them. = =20 > Depending the organization this may or may not seem like a =20 > reasonable precaution. > > --=20 > #include > > > > ------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------- --Boundary_(ID_TKIsMDD9exJ+MOfJGDgXfA) Content-type: text/html; charset=WINDOWS-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE

Begin for= warded message:

From: Steve Crocker <steve@shin= kuro.com>
Date: March 3, 2009 8:42:35 AM EST
Cc= : Steve Crocker <= steve@shinkuro.com>, "ip" <ip@v2.listbox.com>
Subject: Re: [IP] Re: <= span class=3D"Apple-converted-space">  Govt refuses to di= sclose .gov domain names

[= Resending with small typo fixed]

Dave, et al,
When DNS was designed many years ago, there was no co= ncern about disclosure of names within a subdomain.  Over a long= period of time, a large portion of the community has come to conside= r this sensitive information.  I won't argue the merits here. &n= bsp;I am simply reporting a very clear shift in thinking that's taken= place over a period of perhaps two decades.  In many countries,= the top level domain operators cite privacy laws as their reason for= not disclosing the domain names.

In the ori= ginal design of DNSSEC, the security protocol for DNS, a side effect = of the mechanism (NSEC) within the design that provides an authentica= ted declaration that a requested subdomain does not exist is an abili= ty to walk the zone efficiently and learn the names of all the subdom= ains that do exist.  This side effect was deemed unacceptable in= many quarters, leading to resistance to adopt DNSSEC and an addition= al round of design to create an alternative mechanism (NSEC3) to prov= ide authenticated declaration of non-existence of a subdomain without= disclosing the names of the existing neighbors of the requested name= .  Adding this additional mechanism has added a couple of years = to the deployment of DNSSEC.

Your readers ma= y choose to debate whether disclosure of subdomain names is or is not= a security or privacy threat in general, or whether the U.S. Governm= ent should choose to disclose the subdomain names under .gov.  I= am not addressing either of those questions here.   What I am s= aying, however, is that this is not a new question, a large number of= zone operators have spoken forcefully on this subject, and, to the s= urprise of the community that developed the DNS security protocol, th= e requirement to keep the zone contents private emerged late in the p= rocess and had to be accommodated.  All attempts to argue that t= his emergent requirement wasn't really needed -- and there were many = -- failed.  For what it's worth, the .gov policy is the same as = many European countries' policy and others around the world.

Steve



On Mar 3, 2009, at 3:59 AM, David Farber wrote:


Begin forwarded message:

From: "Yiorgos [George] Adamopoulos= " <yiorgos@tee.gr>
Dat= e: March 3, 2009 4:39:17 AM EST
To: David Farber <dave@farber.net>
Cc: ip <ip@v2.listbox.com>
Subject: R= e: [IP] Govt refuses to disclose .gov domain names

On Tue, 3 M= ar 2009, David Farber wrote:
The General= Services Administration has made the rather surprising claim that it= can=92t reveal the list of .gov domains because doing so would repre= sent a security risk:

<= /blockquote>
http://www.i= nformationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=3D215600330

Interestingly engough I made a similar request to = the .GR Hostmaster for a list of .GR domain names, back in 2007. &nbs= p;The response that I got was that it was prohibited by their securit= y policy.

What I can only speculate is, that given a list of d= omains, one can easily create fairly accurate spam lists and spam all= of them.  Depending the organization this may or may not seem l= ike a reasonable precaution.

--
#include <std/disclaime= r.h>



-------------------------------------------http://www.listbox.com
<= /div>


Begin for= warded message:

From: Tom Claburn <tclaburn@t= echweb.com>
Date: March 2, 2009 7:27:37 PM EST<= /font>
S= ubject: Govt refuses to disclose .gov domain names<= /font>


Archives
--Boundary_(ID_TKIsMDD9exJ+MOfJGDgXfA)--   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Tue Mar 3 13:20:38 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFY00D010A3NB@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 13:20:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFY00D0109ZMU@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Tue, 03 Mar 2009 13:20:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFX00B01OF52P@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 09:04:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.5]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFX00A4ROF55P@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 09:04:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from b-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (b-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.49]) by b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 013A416F99 for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 09:04:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by b-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4A241412D for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 09:04:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-mx-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DA19FDE for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 08:54:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (JACKFRUIT.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.201.16]) by a-lb-mx-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25031FDD for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 08:54:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from FARBERMAC.ISRI.CMU.EDU (FARBERMAC.ISRI.CMU.EDU [128.2.220.234]) (authenticated bits=0) by jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n23DruaN001885 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 08:54:46 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2009 08:54:46 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Re: Govt refuses to disclose .gov domain names To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: <4F33BC23-6F94-4396-B306-6B5627ACC630@farber.net> MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.201.16 X-Listbox-UUID: DCF4608C-07FA-11DE-981B-B8FEE388361A X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: <20090303135350.GA19781@gsp.org> List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 Begin forwarded message: From: Rich Kulawiec Date: March 3, 2009 8:53:50 AM EST To: "Yiorgos [George] Adamopoulos" Cc: David Farber , Tom Claburn Subject: Re: [IP] Re: Govt refuses to disclose .gov domain names > Interestingly engough I made a similar request to the .GR Hostmaster > for > a list of .GR domain names, back in 2007. The response that I got was > that it was prohibited by their security policy. > > What I can only speculate is, that given a list of domains, one can > easily create fairly accurate spam lists and spam all of them. Spammers are way, WAY beyond this and have no need of such primitive tactics. It's certainly possible that the keepers of that TLD believe that this is a valid concern, but if so, they're completely wrong. (Oh, incidentally: most of this sort of information, if not all, has been readily available on P2P networks for quite some time.) ---Rsk -------------------------------------------   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Tue Mar 3 13:20:40 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFY00D010A3NB@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 13:20:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFY00D0109ZMU@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Tue, 03 Mar 2009 13:20:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFX00B01OGO6Y@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 09:05:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.56]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFX00A2LOGO6C@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 09:05:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68FE98E6D for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 09:05:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by b-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7066017A1D for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 08:59:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (JACKFRUIT.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.201.16]) by b-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 500BF17A0D for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 08:59:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from FARBERMAC.ISRI.CMU.EDU (FARBERMAC.ISRI.CMU.EDU [128.2.220.234]) (authenticated bits=0) by jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n23Dwk0H002133 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 08:59:09 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2009 08:59:09 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Broadcasters ask court to invalidate FCC's 'white spaces' order To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.201.16 X-Listbox-UUID: 7BEAEC4C-07FB-11DE-88A5-074DC1A22BEB X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 Begin forwarded message: From: dewayne@warpspeed.com (Dewayne Hendricks) Date: March 2, 2009 9:58:58 AM EST To: Dewayne-Net Technology List Subject: [Dewayne-Net] Broadcasters ask court to invalidate FCC's 'white spaces' order [Note: No surprises here. They are going to fight this to the death! DLH] BROADCASTERS ASK COURT TO INVALIDATE FCC'S 'WHITE SPACES' ORDER The National Association of Broadcasters and the Association for Maximum Service Television have filed a complaint with the US Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit against the Federal Communications Commission's decision to allow wireless Internet service on unused television airwaves, arguing it "will allow harmful interference" of television signals. Courtesy of the Benton Foundation RSS Feed: -------------------------------------------   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Tue Mar 3 13:20:41 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFY00D010A3NB@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 13:20:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFY00D0109ZMU@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Tue, 03 Mar 2009 13:20:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFX00B01OQWUK@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 09:11:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.5]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFX00A89OQW5P@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 09:11:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.38]) by b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0214B16404 for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 09:11:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E87837E89AC for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 09:11:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-mx-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D62A5FF3 for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 08:58:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (JACKFRUIT.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.201.16]) by a-lb-mx-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3A62FF2 for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 08:58:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from FARBERMAC.ISRI.CMU.EDU (FARBERMAC.ISRI.CMU.EDU [128.2.220.234]) (authenticated bits=0) by jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n23Dwk0G002133 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 08:58:46 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2009 08:58:45 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Web-Savvy Obama Team Hits Unexpected Bumps To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: <3EB444E1-C848-4DC3-81D3-C526131A5FAF@farber.net> MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.201.16 X-Listbox-UUID: 6B4B16AA-07FB-11DE-B80B-C70AE488361A X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 Begin forwarded message: From: dewayne@warpspeed.com (Dewayne Hendricks) Date: March 2, 2009 9:56:39 AM EST To: Dewayne-Net Technology List Subject: [Dewayne-Net] Web-Savvy Obama Team Hits Unexpected Bumps WEB-SAVVY OBAMA TEAM HITS UNEXPECTED BUMPS The team that ran the most technologically advanced presidential campaign in modern history is finding it difficult to adapt that model to government. WhiteHouse.gov, envisioned as the primary vehicle for President Obama to communicate with the online masses, has been overwhelmed by challenges that staffers did not foresee and technological problems they have yet to solve. Obama, for example, would like to send out mass e-mail updates on presidential initiatives, but the White House does not have the technology in place to do so. The same goes for text messaging, another campaign staple. Beyond the technological upgrades needed to enable text broadcasts, there are security and privacy rules to sort out involving the collection of cellphone numbers, according to Obama aides, who acknowledge being caught off guard by the strictures of government bureaucracy. Wherever this experiment leads, what's certain is that, in the same way Franklin D. Roosevelt harnessed the power of radio and John F. Kennedy leveraged the reach of television to directly communicate with the public, the BlackBerry-carrying Obama wants to use the Internet to redefine the relationship between the presidency and the people. Courtesy of the Benton Foundation RSS Feed: -------------------------------------------   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Tue Mar 3 13:20:42 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFY00D010A3NB@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 13:20:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFY00D0109ZMU@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Tue, 03 Mar 2009 13:20:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFX00L01TB7AN@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:49:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.5]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFX00GOBTB7O4@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:49:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from b-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (b-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.49]) by b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BF6B16EAB for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:50:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by b-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1891613E39 for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:50:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-mx-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4878F427 for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:45:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (CHOKECHERRY.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.185.41]) by a-lb-mx-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1344B424 for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:45:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from FARBERMAC.ISRI.CMU.EDU (FARBERMAC.ISRI.CMU.EDU [128.2.220.234]) (authenticated bits=0) by chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n23FjLjY025793 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:45:21 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:45:21 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] DOJ releases OLC memos To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.185.41 X-Listbox-UUID: 5072D570-080A-11DE-B566-4D05E488361A X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: <6B0D9925-7E8F-483D-BC54-9CF868A7585F@infowarrior.org> List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 Begin forwarded message: From: Richard Forno Date: March 3, 2009 9:54:38 AM EST To: Dave Farber Subject: DOJ releases OLC memos FYI .... 9 memos released regarding the previous administration anti- terror activities http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/documents/olc-memos.htm -------------------------------------------   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Tue Mar 3 13:20:43 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFY00D010A3NB@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 13:20:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFY00D0109ZMU@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Tue, 03 Mar 2009 13:20:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFX00L01TCPGE@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:50:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from a-lb-ex-fastnet.listbox.com (zeppo.pobox.com [207.8.214.3]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFX00J7TTCPXD@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:50:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-ex-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B86169A for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:51:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-mx-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D73043B for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:49:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (CHOKECHERRY.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.185.41]) by a-lb-mx-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 277DF43A for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:49:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from FARBERMAC.ISRI.CMU.EDU (FARBERMAC.ISRI.CMU.EDU [128.2.220.234]) (authenticated bits=0) by chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n23FnQiB025951 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:49:26 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:49:25 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] uber-archivist (and IP'er) Carl Malamud to update another government agency's services - as its head? To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.185.41 X-Listbox-UUID: E129B2B4-080A-11DE-9F65-1012E488361A X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 Begin forwarded message: From: Ethan Ackerman Date: March 3, 2009 10:21:46 AM EST To: David Farber Subject: uber-archivist (and IP'er) Carl Malamud to update another government agency's services - as its head? Reply-To: eackerma@u.washington.edu Greetings Dave, IP'ers might be interested to know that Public.Resource.Org archivist and IP contributor Carl Malamud is the target of a concerted effort by the "yes we scan" committee to be named as 'public printer of the US' - the head of the Government Printing Office. Co-chaired by Paul Vixie, Lawrence Lessig, and David Halperin, the committee ( at http://yeswescan.org/ ) has launched an online signature-gathering effort in hopes that Carl would be considered for the position. Carl's transparency and public records dissemination work is long-running and quite revolutionary. It's probably fitting that the committee is collecting signatures and endorsement online too, including thorugh "signature bundlers" - like BoingBoing: http://www.boingboing.net/2009/02/25/yes-we-scan-carl-mal.html -------------------------------------------   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Tue Mar 3 13:20:44 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFY00D010A3NB@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 13:20:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFY00D0109ZMU@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Tue, 03 Mar 2009 13:20:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFX00L01TDHI2@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:51:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.5]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFX00J86TDHXD@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:51:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.38]) by b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CF2D16393 for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:51:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CCED7EF692 for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:51:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by b-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F6C8174E7 for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:44:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (JACKFRUIT.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.201.16]) by b-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F7D5174E2 for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:44:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from FARBERMAC.ISRI.CMU.EDU (FARBERMAC.ISRI.CMU.EDU [128.2.220.234]) (authenticated bits=0) by jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n23FiDwN006854 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:44:13 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:44:13 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Every step you take: UK underground centre that is spy capital of the world To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: <30B13F4E-2D88-46C0-8670-B502C7C56BBF@farber.net> MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.201.16 X-Listbox-UUID: 2739D14A-080A-11DE-9591-2C42C1A22BEB X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 It is fitting for the UK to have the most camera. After all it was th= e =20 home of George Orwell and "1984" Long live Big Brother. djf Begin forwarded message: =46rom: Brian Randell Date: March 2, 2009 12:57:46 PM EST To: dave@farber.net Subject: Every step you take: UK underground centre that is spy =20 capital of the world Hi Dave: From today's (UK) Guardian, for IP if you so wish. cheers Brian =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Every step you take: UK underground centre that is spy capital of the= =20 world Visitors from around the world come to marvel at Westminster CCTV sys= tem Millions of people walk beneath the unblinking gaze of central =20 London's surveillance cameras. Most are oblivious that deep under the= =20 pavements along which they are walking, beneath restaurant kitchens = =20 and sewage drains, their digital image is gliding across a wall of = =20 plasma screens. Westminster council's CCTV control room, where a click and swivel of = a =20 joystick delivers panoramic views of any central London street, is = =20 seen by civil liberty campaigners as a symbol of the UK's surveillanc= e =20 society. Using the latest remote technology, the cameras rotate 360 degrees, = =20 365 days a year, providing a hi-tech version of what the 18th century= =20 English philosopher Jeremy Bentham conceived as the "Panopticon" - a = =20 space where people can be constantly monitored but never know when = =20 they are being watched. The Home Office, which funded the creation of the =A31.25m facility = =20 seven years ago, believes it to be a "best-practice example" on which= =20 the future of the UK's public surveillance system should be modelled. So famed has central London's surveillance network become that figure= s =20 released yesterday revealed that more than 6,000 officials from 30 = =20 countries have come to learn lessons from the centre. They include police with the job of keeping order in the most =20 dangerous cities on earth, from S=E3o Paulo in Brazil to Baltimore in= =20 the United States, as well as law enforcement officials from countrie= s =20 with a notorious disregard for the rights of citizens, such as China. A delegation of foreign visitors turns up at Westminster's =20 subterranean CCTV control room on a monthly basis. The FBI has paid a= =20 visit, as have - more recently - police forces from South Africa, = =20 Japan and Mexico. The UK, whose police forces pioneered experiments with the technology= =20 in the 1960s, leads the world in surveillance of its people. Exactly how many CCTV cameras there are in the UK is not known, =20 although one study four years ago estimated 4.8m cameras had been = =20 installed. What is rarely disputed is that the UK has more cameras per citizen = =20 than anywhere else. =2E . . ---- Full story at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/mar/02/westminster-cctv-system-priv= acy -- School of Computing Science, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyn= e, NE1 7RU, UK EMAIL =3D Brian.Randell@ncl.ac.uk PHONE =3D +44 191 222 7923 FAX =3D +44 191 222 8232 URL =3D http://www.cs.ncl.ac.uk/people/bria= n.randell -------------------------------------------   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Tue Mar 3 13:20:45 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFY00D010A3NB@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 13:20:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFY00D0109ZMU@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Tue, 03 Mar 2009 13:20:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFX00M01TT71S@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 11:00:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.56]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFX00JAKTT7XD@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 11:00:43 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 467609776 for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 11:01:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-mx-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADB5444A for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:52:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (JACKFRUIT.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.201.16]) by a-lb-mx-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B35A6449 for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:52:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from FARBERMAC.ISRI.CMU.EDU (FARBERMAC.ISRI.CMU.EDU [128.2.220.234]) (authenticated bits=0) by jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n23FqWAD007246 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:52:32 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:52:32 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Job difficulties for international students? - News To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: <0FE4E004-3E48-471F-8635-591BEED507FE@farber.net> MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_cNfMusC+PfPumSNHR46TTA)" X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.201.16 X-Listbox-UUID: 51937FB2-080B-11DE-B200-471BE488361A X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 --Boundary_(ID_cNfMusC+PfPumSNHR46TTA) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT http://media.www.dailypennsylvanian.com/media/storage/paper882/news/2009/03/03/News/Job-Difficulties.For.International.Students-3656446.shtml?reffeature=htmlemailedition International students who had lined up permanent employment on an H-1B visa may find themselves out of a job, according to a Career Services e-mail circulated among students today. The e-mail notified students of an amendment to the stimulus package proposed by Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) and Bernie Sanders (Independent-Vermont) that limits firms receiving funds from the Troubled Assets Relief Program from hiring international workers on H-1B visas. Those visas allow employers to hire non-immigrant international workers in a specialized field. International students use the visas for permanent employment, not internships. Under the amendment, employers must take extra steps to hire foreign workers such as ensuring that international hires do not displace U.S. workers and making a good-faith effort to find U.S. workers to fill positions at wages at least equal to those offered to a potential H-1B employee. For Penn, which accepts approximately 10 percent of its undergraduate student body from foreign countries each year, these restrictions may pose a problem for international juniors and seniors seeking jobs and internships. Some Penn students have already had their offers rescinded, said Career Services director Patricia Rose. ------------------------------------------- --Boundary_(ID_cNfMusC+PfPumSNHR46TTA) Content-type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE

http://media.www.dailypennsylv= anian.com/media/storage/paper882/news/2009/03/03/News/Job-Difficultie= s.For.International.Students-3656446.shtml?reffeature=3Dhtmlemailedit= ion


In= ternational students who had lined up permanent employment on an H-1B= visa may find themselves out of a job, according to a Career Service= s e-mail circulated among students today.

The e-mail notified students of an amen= dment to the stimulus package proposed by Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Io= wa) and Bernie Sanders (Independent-Vermont) that limits firms receiv= ing funds from the Troubled Assets Relief Program from hiring interna= tional workers on H-1B visas. 

Those visas allow employers to hire non-immig= rant international workers in a specialized field. International stud= ents use the visas for permanent employment, not internships.

Under the amendment= , employers must take extra steps to hire foreign workers such as ens= uring that international hires do not displace U.S. workers and makin= g a good-faith effort to find U.S. workers to fill positions at wages= at least equal to those offered to a potential H-1B employee.

For Penn, which ac= cepts approximately 10 percent of its undergraduate student body from= foreign countries each year, these restrictions may pose a problem f= or international juniors and seniors seeking jobs and internships.
Some Penn stud= ents have already had their offers rescinded, said Career Services di= rector Patricia Rose.
<snip>
Archives
--Boundary_(ID_cNfMusC+PfPumSNHR46TTA)--   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Tue Mar 3 16:49:09 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFY006019XSB5@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 16:49:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFY006019XPB0@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Tue, 03 Mar 2009 16:49:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFY00D010ABOM@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 13:20:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.5]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFY009A90AB25@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 13:20:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.38]) by b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B4241692D for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 13:20:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C8387FC406 for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 13:20:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by b-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF7A31728C for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 13:00:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (CHOKECHERRY.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.185.41]) by b-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16F6417275 for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 13:00:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.1.100] (c-71-206-239-18.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [71.206.239.18]) (authenticated bits=0) by chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n23I0QSi002116 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 13:00:27 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2009 13:00:26 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Fed Eliminates Compensation Limits for TALF SponsorsBloomberg.com: Worldwide To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: <3C25390B-6C4F-46C3-BD6E-9F4F220866C7@farber.net> MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_rFqf1r/HTJQlo72HFSmF2A)" X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.185.41 X-Listbox-UUID: 356255E0-081D-11DE-A300-317BC1A22BEB X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 --Boundary_(ID_rFqf1r/HTJQlo72HFSmF2A) Content-type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Fed Eliminates Compensation Limits for TALF Sponsors (Update1) Email | Print | A A A By Scott Lanman March 3 (Bloomberg) -- The Federal Reserve eliminated executive-=20 compensation limits for sponsors of asset-backed securities accepted = =20 under a new $1 trillion program, indicating the rules may have =20 hampered efforts to get the plan underway. The Fed isn=92t applying the requirements to the Term Asset- Backed = =20 Securities Loan Facility because of the government=92s =93desire to = =20 encourage market participants to stimulate credit formation and =20 utilize the facility,=94 the New York Fed said in a question-and-answ= er =20 document on its Web site today. The change suggests the government doesn=92t intend to apply =20 compensation limits beyond firms that receive direct investments from= =20 the Treasury=92s $700 billion bailout fund. Officials have yet to = =20 announce whether such requirements will be imposed on firms =20 participating in a separate effort to remove as much as $1 trillion o= f =20 distressed assets from banks=92 balance sheets. =93Executive compensation restrictions are targeted towards ensuring = =20 that executives of institutions that receive government support are = =20 not unjustly enriched,=94 the New York Fed said in a separate questio= n-=20 and-answer document on its Web site. The revised terms and conditions of the TALF, posted on the New York = =20 Fed=92s Web site, also omitted a previous section on compensation = =20 requirements. The limits were previously instituted because the =20 program is being seeded with capital from the $700 billion financial-= =20 stability plan, which has provided capital injections to banks with = =20 compensation rules attached. ------------------------------------------- --Boundary_(ID_rFqf1r/HTJQlo72HFSmF2A) Content-type: text/html; charset=WINDOWS-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
Fed Eliminates Compensation Limits= for TALF Sponsors (Update1) 
Email | Print | A A A

By Scott Lanman

March 3 (Bloomberg) -- The Federal Reserve elimin= ated executive-compensation limits for sponsors of asset-backed secur= ities accepted under a new $1 trillion program, indicating the rules = may have hampered efforts to get the plan underway.

The Fed isn=92t applying the requirements to the Term A= sset- Backed Securities Loan Facility because of the government=92s = =93desire to encourage market participants to stimulate credit format= ion and utilize the facility,=94 the New York Fed said in a question-= and-answer document on its Web site today.

The change suggests the government doesn=92t intend to apply com= pensation limits beyond firms that receive direct investments from th= e Treasury=92s $700 billion bailout fund. Officials have yet to annou= nce whether such requirements will be imposed on firms participating = in a separate effort to remove as much as $1 trillion of distressed a= ssets from banks=92 balance sheets.

= =93Executive compensation restrictions are targeted towards ensuring = that executives of institutions that receive government support are n= ot unjustly enriched,=94 the New York Fed said in a separate question= -and-answer document on its Web site.

= The revised terms and conditions of the TALF, posted on the New York = Fed=92s Web site, also omitted a previous section on compensation req= uirements. The limits were previously instituted because the program = is being seeded with capital from the $700 billion financial-stabilit= y plan, which has provided capital injections to banks with compensat= ion rules attached.


Archives
--Boundary_(ID_rFqf1r/HTJQlo72HFSmF2A)--   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Tue Mar 3 16:49:10 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFY006019XSB5@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 16:49:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFY006019XPB0@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Tue, 03 Mar 2009 16:49:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFY00F010J64V@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 13:25:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.5]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFY009E00J63H@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 13:25:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.38]) by b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A59E16FF3 for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 13:26:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BFA37FCB0D for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 13:26:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by apex.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D473B5F for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 13:02:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (JACKFRUIT.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.201.16]) by apex.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CD0DE466 for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 13:02:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.1.100] (c-71-206-239-18.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [71.206.239.18]) (authenticated bits=0) by jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n23I1dx6011964 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 13:01:40 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2009 13:01:39 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Re: Anonymity of blog readers To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Listbox-UUID: 759E5C44-081D-11DE-B3AF-C863E383C9F3 X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 Begin forwarded message: From: "Paul Levy" Date: March 3, 2009 12:05:35 PM EST To: "David Farber" , "ip" Subject: Anonymity of blog readers Jim's surmise is correct -- the case, in which we represented the newspaper chain that was opposing the subpoena -- DID involve the anonymity of citizens who wrote comments on a newspaper's online blog, and not the anonymity of those who were only readers. However, there is a case currently pending in Buckingham County, Virginia (south of Charlottesville) in which a libel plaintiff has subpoenaed the IP addresses of everybody who has even READ the allegedly defamatory stories online. The theory seems to be that the plaintiff can then interrogate them about how they perceived the story and whether it had any impact on the plaintiff's reputation. It is a chilling theory indeed. We represent a blogger who received a similar subpoena after he commented on the libel litigation (it seems that this plaintiff won't tolerate ANY discussion). As it happens, our client does not have access to readers' IP addresses, so the issue will be moot as it applies to him, but it is possible that the newspaper may have such access, so the issue may well be joined for that subpoena. Paul Alan Levy Public Citizen Litigation Group 1600 - 20th Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20009 (202) 588-1000 http://www.citizen.org/litigation >>> David Farber 3/3/2009 5:00 AM >>> Begin forwarded message: From: Jim Warren Date: March 2, 2009 8:19:47 PM EST To: dave@farber.net Cc: labmanager@gmail.com Subject: Re: [IP] Court sets standard for online anonymity protections > From: No-Name > > Web sites involved in defamation suits are not required to > immediately hand over the identities of readers who leave anonymous > comments ... I think (I HOPE!) that this concerned the identities of writers; not of the "readers". (However, is it noteworthy that various law enforcers - foreign adn domestic - have demanded that librarians provide information about which readers check-out various publications, as well as demanding identities of everyone who views or downloads various content that is prohibited - somewhere.) Irregardless, please note that - if (when!) laws DO force disclosure of each author of each writing posted online, then web-sites will have to remove The Federalist Papers, considered the third-most important legal document in the nation, after the Constitution and Declaration of Independence! The writers of those crucial public debates (including the Anti- Federalist Papers) did so anonymously, with strong justification at the time. The authorship of those individual papers was never confirmed by their writers, although most identities were later alleged by various third parties and historians, long after the fact, including by modern researchers who used statistical analyses of the writing patterns. (Will we next have guilt by statistical probability?) --jim ------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Wed Mar 4 10:33:40 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFZ00K01N7SFD@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 10:33:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFZ00K01N7NEY@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Wed, 04 Mar 2009 10:33:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFZ00D018J3EE@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 05:16:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.5]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFZ00AHI8J3EC@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 05:16:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.38]) by b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F53E16F93 for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 05:16:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C9598211BE for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 05:16:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-mx-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58A56B6E for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 05:10:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (JACKFRUIT.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.201.16]) by a-lb-mx-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F41FB6D for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 05:10:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.1.100] (c-71-206-239-18.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [71.206.239.18]) (authenticated bits=0) by jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n24AA1H1000456 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 05:10:02 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 05:10:00 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Re: Govt refuses to disclose .gov domain names To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: <0A99D631-E233-4BC9-8AF0-D489AB51D166@farber.net> MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.201.16 X-Listbox-UUID: A25EC624-08A4-11DE-9529-461DE488361A X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: <49ADE28D.4050903@bbiw.net> List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 Begin forwarded message: From: Dave CROCKER Date: March 3, 2009 9:08:13 PM EST To: dave@farber.net Cc: Steve Crocker , "ip" , Rich Kulawiec , "Yiorgos [George] Adamopoulos" , Tom Claburn Subject: Re: [IP] Re: Govt refuses to disclose .gov domain names > *From: *Steve Crocker > ... > When DNS was designed many years ago, there was no concern about > disclosure of names within a subdomain. ... > Your readers may choose to debate whether disclosure of subdomain > names is or is not a security or privacy threat in general, or > whether the U.S. Government should choose to disclose the subdomain > names under .gov. I am not addressing either of those questions here. Dave, et al, The question that Steve is not addressing is the only one I took from the InformationWeek article: Why did the US Government invoke security concerns in denying a Freedom Of Information Act request? In the context of FOIA, "security" means national security. What is the national threat, in satisfying the request? There are a variety of security-related DNS issues that are long- standing and are not specific to the US Government. DNS privacy concerns typically pertain to personal privacy of the domain registrant, notably the associated Whois data, not simply the domain name, itself. The request was not for personal data, nor for Whois data. Remember that domain names in the public DNS are, by definition, public entries. So "privacy" seems doubly irrelevant to this refusal. Also, as Steve notes, other aspects of DNS infrastructure protection, particularly against spoofing of DNS entries, dates back quite a ways. In fact, the effort on DNSSec was started under my watch as IETF Area Director for Middleware and when Steve was Area Director for Security, roughly 15 years ago. Domain name scraping, to facilitate spamming, is also a long-standing issue, but with spam consuming 90-98% of the public email traffic, it's difficult to see how divulging .gov domain names will make that problem significantly worse. If the US Government is concerned about "security" in terms of these long-standing DNS issues, it should say so. If it is concerned about security in terms of a national threat, it should equally explain that. It should further explain why it the names were previously available, but now are not. What threats have changed? d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net -------------------------------------------   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Wed Mar 4 10:33:41 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFZ00K01N7SFD@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 10:33:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFZ00K01N7NEY@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Wed, 04 Mar 2009 10:33:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFZ00G01A5P7V@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 05:51:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from a-lb-ex-fastnet.listbox.com (zeppo.pobox.com [207.8.214.3]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFZ00F5TA5O5A@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 05:51:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-ex-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1B8AD15 for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 05:51:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-mx-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6B9FC9C for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 05:49:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (CHOKECHERRY.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.185.41]) by a-lb-mx-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA792C9B for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 05:49:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.1.102] (c-71-206-239-18.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [71.206.239.18]) (authenticated bits=0) by chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n24An1lX023428 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 05:49:48 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 05:49:50 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Esther in space? To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: <9B0FC834-5150-4E51-A1B0-3A7EF26B3459@farber.net> MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.185.41 X-Listbox-UUID: 30563ACA-08AA-11DE-84ED-EA24E488361A X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 Begin forwarded message: From: Mary Eisenhart Date: March 3, 2009 10:20:26 PM EST To: dave@farber.net Subject: Esther in space? just saw a clip on TV from some Russian agency showing Esther all suited up to head for the space station later this month. Simonyi too. First I've heard of it! -------------------------------------------   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Wed Mar 4 10:33:42 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFZ00K01N7SFD@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 10:33:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFZ00K01N7NEY@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Wed, 04 Mar 2009 10:33:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFZ00N01DKK8X@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 07:05:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.5]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFZ00LC8DKKU0@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 07:05:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from d-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (d-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.3]) by b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 190E9163E0 for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 07:05:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by d-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0952D2FB8D for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 07:05:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by b-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40CCA17742 for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 06:57:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (JACKFRUIT.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.201.16]) by b-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7130F17732 for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 06:57:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.1.102] (c-71-206-239-18.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [71.206.239.18]) (authenticated bits=0) by jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n24Buxgi001691 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 06:56:59 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 06:56:58 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Merrill's $10 Million Men To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.201.16 X-Listbox-UUID: 9B1450F0-08B3-11DE-9EA7-D16EC1A22BEB X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 Begin forwarded message: From: "Ronald J Riley \(RJR Com\)" Date: March 4, 2009 6:43:27 AM EST To: Subject: FW: WSJ NEWS ALERT: Merrill's $10 Million Men from The Wall Street Journal Culled from a WSJ news alert. March 4, 2009 As Merrill Lynch staggered last year, 11 top executives were paid more than $10 million each in cash and stock, and 149 more received $3 million or more. Merrill's 10 highest-paid employees got a total of $209 million in cash and stock in 2008, up slightly from $201 million paid to the top 10 a year earlier. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123612736445024231.html?mod=djemalertNEWS -------------------------------------------   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Wed Mar 4 10:33:43 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFZ00K01N7SFD@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 10:33:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFZ00K01N7NEY@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Wed, 04 Mar 2009 10:33:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFZ00101F1WGB@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 07:37:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from a-lb-ex-fastnet.listbox.com (zeppo.pobox.com [207.8.214.3]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFZ0003BF1W9Q@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 07:37:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-ex-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF2961EB for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 07:37:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7610713BB4 for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 07:35:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (JACKFRUIT.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.201.16]) by a-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98CF113BAA for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 07:35:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.1.100] (c-71-206-239-18.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [71.206.239.18]) (authenticated bits=0) by jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n24CZm8W002243 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 07:35:48 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 07:35:47 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Jack Schwartz of NYU dies at 79 To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: <84866118-E6BD-4E47-B3EF-6AA097C7C283@farber.net> MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_Y8aJdYOMOsqDysj77ZRi4Q)" X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.201.16 X-Listbox-UUID: FF7D8462-08B8-11DE-9922-544EB4A18844 X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 --Boundary_(ID_Y8aJdYOMOsqDysj77ZRi4Q) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Begin forwarded message: From: Peter Capek Date: March 4, 2009 7:26:08 AM EST To: Dave Farber - IP Subject: Jack Schwartz of NYU dies at 79 http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/04/science/04schwartz.html Jacob T. Schwartz, 79, Restless Scientist, Dies By JOHN MARKOFF Published: March 3, 2009 Jacob T. Schwartz, a mathematician and computer scientist who did seminal research in fields as diverse as molecular biology and robotics, died Monday at his home in Manhattan. He was 79. He died in his sleep of liver cancer, his wife, Diana, said. He was chairman of the computer science department at New York University, which he founded, from 1964 to 1980. During a career that also included 42 years as a professor at the Courant Institute for Mathematical Sciences at the university, Dr. Schwartz wrote more than a dozen books and more than 100 scientific papers and research reports. At his death Dr. Schwartz was actively working on research in both molecular biology and logic. Throughout his life, Dr. Schwartz, who was known as Jack, moved from one scientific field to the next. He was not a dilettante, but mastered each field in turn and then made significant contributions. (snip) ------------------------------------------- --Boundary_(ID_Y8aJdYOMOsqDysj77ZRi4Q) Content-type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE

Begin for= warded message:

From: Peter Capek <capek@ieee.org>
=
Subject: Jack Schwartz of NYU dies = at 79

http://www.ny= times.com/2009/03/04/science/04schwartz.html

= Jacob T. Schwartz, 79, Restless Scientist, Dies

Published: Mar= ch 3, 2009

Jacob T. Schwartz, a mathematician and computer = scientist who did seminal research in fields as diverse as molecular = biology and robotics, died Monday at his home in Manhattan. He was 79= .


He died = in his sleep of liver cancer, his wife, Diana, said. He was chairman= of the computer science department at New York University, which he founde= d, from 1964 to 1980.

During a career that also included 42 y= ears as a professor at the Courant Institute for Mathematical Science= s at the university, Dr. Schwartz wrote more than a dozen books and m= ore than 100 scientific papers and research reports. At his death Dr.= Schwartz was actively working on research in both molecular biology = and logic.

Throughout his life, Dr. Schwartz, who was known a= s Jack, moved from one scientific field to the next. He was not a dil= ettante, but mastered each field in turn and then made significant co= ntributions.

(snip)

Archives
--Boundary_(ID_Y8aJdYOMOsqDysj77ZRi4Q)--   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Wed Mar 4 10:33:44 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFZ00K01N7SFD@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 10:33:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFZ00K01N7NEY@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Wed, 04 Mar 2009 10:33:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KFY00M01JHKFM@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 20:15:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from a-lb-ex-fastnet.listbox.com (zeppo.pobox.com [207.8.214.3]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KFY00KFDJHKLD@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 20:15:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-ex-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B191C325 for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 20:15:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2ED213B8E for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 16:19:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (JACKFRUIT.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.201.16]) by a-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDDA613B76 for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 16:18:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.1.102] (c-71-206-239-18.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [71.206.239.18]) (authenticated bits=0) by jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n23LIoOY019084 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2009 16:18:50 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2009 16:18:49 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Julius Genachowski Nominated to Chair FCC To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: <368E637E-E2BC-45FE-AB8B-A178BBB6978D@farber.net> MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_O2GpyG2zQEfxvvmeIdtdQQ)" X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.201.16 X-Listbox-UUID: E66064FC-0838-11DE-A28E-3F58B4A18844 X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 --Boundary_(ID_O2GpyG2zQEfxvvmeIdtdQQ) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT http://voices.washingtonpost.com/posttech/?hpid=topnews ------------------------------------------- --Boundary_(ID_O2GpyG2zQEfxvvmeIdtdQQ) Content-type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/posttech/?hpid=topnews

--Boundary_(ID_O2GpyG2zQEfxvvmeIdtdQQ)--   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Wed Mar 4 15:48:54 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KG0002011TFP8@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:48:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KG0002011T9P3@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:48:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KG000P010I516@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:20:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.5]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KG000O1G0I5TP@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:20:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from b-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (b-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.49]) by b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3293E160B0 for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:20:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by b-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25C8114366 for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:20:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-mx-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4531C30A for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:15:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (CHOKECHERRY.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.185.41]) by a-lb-mx-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14022309 for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:15:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.1.103] (c-71-206-239-18.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [71.206.239.18]) (authenticated bits=0) by chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n24KEvKd011801 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:15:47 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:15:47 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] EFFector 22.06: EFF Releases Surveillance Self Defense To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: <5537325D-71EF-4D2B-BA5B-42866A69B887@farber.net> MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.185.41 X-Listbox-UUID: 423282E0-08F9-11DE-934B-8B1DE488361A X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: <28000538.1236193457482.JavaMail.www@app18> List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 Begin forwarded message: From: EFFector list Date: March 4, 2009 1:57:10 PM EST To: eff-all@eff.org Subject: [E-B] EFFector 22.06: EFF Releases Surveillance Self Defense Reply-To: EFFector list EFFector Vol. 22, No. 06 March 4, 2009 editor@eff.org A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation ISSN 1062-9424 : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : In our 501st issue: * EFF RELEASES SURVEILLANCE SELF DEFENSE -- an online how-to guide for protecting your private data against government spying. EFF created the site with the help of the Open Society Institute in order to educate Americans about the law and technology of communications surveillance and computer searches and seizures, and to provide the information and tools necessary to keep their private data out of the government's hands. The guide includes tips on assessing the security risks to your personal computer files and communications, strategies for interacting with law enforcement, and articles on specific defensive technologies such as encryption that can help protect the privacy of your data For the full press release: http://www.eff.org/press/archives/2009/03/03 For Surveillance Self Defense: http://ssd.eff.org * WARNER MUSIC GROUP IS CENSORING A MYRIAD OF FAIR USES by using YouTube's Video Identification tool to send blanket takedown notices, and very few YouTubers are willing to challenge the takedowns. Why? Because our broken copyright system leaves them facing the prospect of paying outrageous statutory damages and even possibly Warner's attorneys' fees if they stand up, fight back and, despite overwhelming odds in their favor, lose. It's time for Warner to take some responsibility and stop the censorship. The best thing would be for Warner to go back to how it treated videos before. At a minimum, Warner should assure YouTubers that the company won't escalate straight to lawsuit after a content ID takedown is disputed without first availing itself of the DMCA takedown option. If Warner doesn't stop on its own, EFF is interested in bringing a good case to challenge this behavior. If you made a fair use video and you want to fight back, we want to hear from you. For our YouTube removal primer: http://www.eff.org/issues/intellectual-property/guide-to-youtube-removals For fair use video takedowns, contact: info@eff.org For the full blog post: http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/02/hey-warner-leave-those-kids-alone For examples of fair use videos taken off YouTube: http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/02/victims-warner-censorship-literal-videos : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : EFF Updates * "Open Access" Policies Threatened by Copyright Bill The poorly named Fair Copyright in Research Works Act would foreclose on all the public publishing requirements of National Institutes of Health research and prevent the government from expanding the open access approach to research funded by other agencies. Original post: http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/02/open-access-policies-threatened-copyright-bill Additional information: http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/03/maplight-org-illuminates-anti-open-access-bill-mon * Yes We Scan: Carl Malamud for Public Printer On President Obama's first day in office, he announced his commitment to "an unprecedented level of openness in Government." Appointing Carl Malamud to Public Printer would be an excellent step towards that goal. http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/03/yes-we-scan * EFF Urges Court to Reject Warrantless GPS Tracking EFF and the ACLU urged a U.S. appeals court today to reject government claims that federal agents have an unfettered right to install a Global Positioning System (GPS) location-tracking device on anyone's car without a search warrant. http://www.eff.org/press/archives/2009/03/03-0 * DOJ Releases Secret Bush Era OLC Memos The Obama Administration has released two previously undisclosed OLC memoranda and seven previously undisclosed OLC opinions written by the Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel during the Bush Administration. http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/03/doj-releases-bush-era-olc-memos * Bush Admin. Claimed 4th Amendment Didn't Apply to NSA It turns out that the Bush Administration did think it could spy on Americans in the U.S. without regard to the Constitution. http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/03/bush-administration-asserted-fourth-amendment-did- * Court Denies Government Appeal in Al-Haramain Case The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals denied the government's appeal of Chief Judge Vaughn Walker's January 5, 2009, decision in Al-Haramain v. Obama (formerly known as Al-Haramain v. Bush). http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/02/ninth-circuit-appeals-court-denies-government-appe * PTO to Reissue Narrowed Version of NeoMedia Patent Thanks to EFF's Patent Busting Project, last July, the USPTO released an initial opinion invalidating a NeoMedia patent that broadly claimed to cover database lookups using things like barcodes. This week, the PTO announced that it intends to reissue a narrower patent to Neomedia. http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/02/patent-office-reissue-narrowed-version-neomedia-pa * White House Responds to Privacy Complaints? The White House has quietly shifted from using YouTube-hosted videos to Flash-based videos hosted on government servers, eliminating the need for viewers to allow third party cookies to be installed on their computers in order to access government-released videos. http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/03/white-house-responds-privacy-complaints * Last.fm and the Diabolical Power of Data Mining Websites that collect and republish seemingly innocuous facts about their users are often vulnerable to data mining. http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/02/last-fm-and-the-diabolical-power-of-data-mining : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : miniLinks ~ Judge Orders Defendent to Decrypt Laptop A federal judge in Vermont ordered a criminal defendant to provide his PGP passphrase so that prosecutors can examine his computer. http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10172866-38.html ~ Applying the 4th Amendment to the Internet Orin Kerr presents some general principals for a technology-neutral translation of 4th Amendment principals from physical space to cyberspace. http://volokh.com/posts/1235671894.shtml ~ RIAA Layoffs Is the coming "bloodbath" the beginning of the end for the organization? http://i.gizmodo.com/5162747/riaa-layoffs-bloodbath-may-be-the-beginning-of-the-end-for-the-evil-organization For more miniLinks: http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/03/minilinks-2009-03-03 : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : Announcements * Come See EFF at eTech! EFF be at the O'Reilly Emerging Technologies Conference March 9 - 12 in San Jose, California. Stop by to say hello, and update your membership! Use code et09sed40 to get a 40% discount on registration for eTech. For more information on eTech: http://en.oreilly.com/et2009/public/content/home * New Staff Members at EFF Two new staff members have joined the EFF team. For a quick introduction to EFF's new Systems Administrator and Membership Coordinator: http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/02/effs-two-new-staff-members : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : . : Administrivia EFFector is published by: The Electronic Frontier Foundation http://www.eff.org/about Editor: Sara Bassett, Membership Services Assistant sara@eff.org Membership & donation queries: membership@eff.org To support EFF: secure.eff.org/donate General EFF, legal, policy, or online resources queries: information@eff.org Back issues of EFFector are available at: http://www.eff.org/effector/ To unsubscribe or change your subscription preferences: http://action.eff.org/site/CO?i=T3etVfdwEmOtOIugh8iUI4xlyl5ECq05&cid=1041 To change your email address: http://action.eff.org/addresschange Reproduction of this publication in electronic media is encouraged. This newsletter is printed on 100% recycled electrons. To unsubscribe from all future email, paste the following URL into your browser: http://action.eff.org/site/CO?i=_fnyKeAEfj4bue6iBWz1r8p1Pf6NHEI_&cid=1041 -------------------------------------------   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Wed Mar 4 15:48:55 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KG0002011TFP8@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:48:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KG0002011T9P3@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:48:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KG0000010PBBQ@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:24:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.5]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KG000O3P0PBTP@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:24:47 -0500 (EST) Received: from a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.38]) by b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1527E16D17 for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:25:04 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 059D1839E0A for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:25:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by b-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36B94171CB for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:15:09 -0500 (EST) Received: from chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (CHOKECHERRY.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.185.41]) by b-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4555E171BE for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:15:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.1.103] (c-71-206-239-18.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [71.206.239.18]) (authenticated bits=0) by chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n24KEvKc011801 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:15:01 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:14:57 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] New Book, available online, perhaps of interest to some on the IP List To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_vPwqt30Cos/r/Gc2vlYUBg)" X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.185.41 X-Listbox-UUID: 286C85F4-08F9-11DE-9BDC-7589C1A22BEB X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 --Boundary_(ID_vPwqt30Cos/r/Gc2vlYUBg) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Begin forwarded message: From: Jonathan Aronson Date: March 4, 2009 2:30:57 PM EST To: Dave Farber Subject: New Book, available online, perhaps of interest to some on the IP List Dave, I am delighted to let you know that my new book (with Peter Cowhey, now the Senior Counselor at USTR) has been published by MIT Press. The Transforming Global Information and Communication Markets: The Political Economy of Innovation website is live. The book is available for free download under a Creative Commons license at : http://www.globalinfoandtelecom.org. We would welcome your comments, criticisms, and corrections are welcome. Jonathan Aronson Annenberg School for Communication University of Southern California ------------------------------------------- --Boundary_(ID_vPwqt30Cos/r/Gc2vlYUBg) Content-type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE

Begin for= warded message:

From: Jonathan Aronson <aronson@us= c.edu>
Date: March 4, 2009 2:30:57 PM EST
To: = Dave Farber <dave@fa= rber.net>
Subject: New Book, available online= , perhaps of interest to some on the IP List


Dave,

I = am delighted to let you know that my new book (with Peter Cowhey, now= the Senior Counselor at USTR) has been published by MIT Press.
<= br> The Transforming Global Information and Communication Markets:= The Political Economy of Innovation website is live.  
= The book is available for free download under a Creative Commons lice= nse at :  http://www.globalinfoandtelecom.org.  

We would welcome your comments, criticisms, and c= orrections are welcome.

Jonathan Aronson
Annenberg Schoo= l for Communication
University of Southern California

Archives
--Boundary_(ID_vPwqt30Cos/r/Gc2vlYUBg)--   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Wed Mar 4 15:48:56 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KG0002011TFP8@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:48:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KG0002011T9P3@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:48:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KG00000113MXO@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:33:22 -0500 (EST) Received: from b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.5]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KG000O7413MTP@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:33:22 -0500 (EST) Received: from a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.38]) by b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7EF116DD6 for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:33:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9C0083A867 for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:33:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by apex.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1878731B8 for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:18:25 -0500 (EST) Received: from jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (JACKFRUIT.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.201.16]) by apex.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4C8F6C for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:18:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.1.103] (c-71-206-239-18.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [71.206.239.18]) (authenticated bits=0) by jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n24KHpDm018421 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:17:56 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:17:51 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] New ITU ICT Development Index compares 154 countries To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: <01C8A9AA-0C44-4130-9CA8-65ECCA967290@farber.net> MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.201.16 X-Listbox-UUID: 9D31F98C-08F9-11DE-889C-CFF6DAEFEC45 X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 Begin forwarded message: =46rom: dewayne@warpspeed.com (Dewayne Hendricks) Date: March 2, 2009 11:48:15 AM EST To: Dewayne-Net Technology List Subject: [Dewayne-Net] New ITU ICT Development Index compares 154 = =20 countries [Note: This item comes from reader Fred Maia. DLH] =46rom: Fred Maia Date: March 2, 2009 2:08:43 AM PST To: dewayne@warpspeed.com Subject: Possible posting item - from ITU today Interesting comparison from the ITU today of how the various countrie= s =20 of the world have improved their information and communication =20 technologies (ICT) over the past five years. New ITU ICT Development Index compares 154 countries Northern Europe tops ICT developments Geneva, 2 March 2009 ITU=92s new ICT Development Index (IDI) compare= s =20 developments in information and communication technologies (ICT) in = =20 154 countries over a five-year period from 2002 to 2007. The Index combines 11 indicators into a single measure that can be = =20 used as a benchmarking tool globally, regionally and at the country = =20 level. These are related to ICT access, use and skills, such as =20 households with a computer the number of Internet users; and literacy= =20 levels. The most advanced countries in ICT are from Northern Europe. The = =20 exception is the Republic of Korea. Sweden tops the new ITU ICT =20 Development Index, followed by the Republic of Korea, Denmark, the = =20 Netherlands, Iceland and Norway. They are followed by other, mainly = =20 high-income countries from Europe, Asia and North America. Western an= d =20 Northern Europe and North America are the regions with the highest ID= I =20 scores, and most countries from these regions are among the top twent= y =20 ICT economies. Poor countries, in particular the least developed = =20 countries, remain at the lower end of the index with limited access t= o =20 ICT infrastructure, including fixed and mobile telephony, Internet an= d =20 broadband.RSS Feed: -------------------------------------------   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Thu Mar 5 12:25:02 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KG100201MN9CN@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Thu, 05 Mar 2009 12:16:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KG100201MN5CG@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Thu, 05 Mar 2009 12:16:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KG000E018W4SX@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 18:21:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.5]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KG000D628W4XW@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 18:21:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from b-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (b-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.49]) by b-lb-ob-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4510E16A27 for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 18:21:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by b-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3727514545 for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 18:21:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-mx-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35D95B7D for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 18:13:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (CHOKECHERRY.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.185.41]) by a-lb-mx-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08127B7C for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 18:12:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.1.104] (c-71-206-239-18.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [71.206.239.18]) (authenticated bits=0) by chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n24NCDv1018023 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 04 Mar 2009 18:12:57 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 18:12:57 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Re: Merrill's $10 Million Men To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: <542E884F-C435-4830-8D19-1DB7282B313E@farber.net> MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_sPVvOJiVXDCDtWwaTVkbaQ)" X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.185.41 X-Listbox-UUID: 00FC8DFC-0912-11DE-8E46-0C23E488361A X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 --Boundary_(ID_sPVvOJiVXDCDtWwaTVkbaQ) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Begin forwarded message: From: Randall Webmail Date: March 4, 2009 3:52:20 PM EST To: dave@farber.net Cc: rjr@rjriley.com Subject: Re: [IP] Merrill's $10 Million Men They had to be paid multiple millions of dollars, else Merrill would have been forced to find less-competent people to bankrupt the company. It is the fault of the Boards of Directors, which have entirely failed in their duties to safeguard the interests of shareholders. ------------------------------------------- --Boundary_(ID_sPVvOJiVXDCDtWwaTVkbaQ) Content-type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
= They had to be paid multiple millions of dollars, else Merrill would = have been forced to find less-competent people to bankrupt the compan= y.

It is the fault of the Boards of Directors, which have enti= rely failed in their duties to safeguard the interests of shareholder= s.

Begin for= warded message:

From: Randall Webmail <rvh40@i= nsightbb.com>
Date: March 4, 2009 3:52:20 PM EST<= /font>


Archives
--Boundary_(ID_sPVvOJiVXDCDtWwaTVkbaQ)--   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Thu Mar 5 12:25:03 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KG100201MN9CN@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Thu, 05 Mar 2009 12:16:21 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KG100201MN5CG@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Thu, 05 Mar 2009 12:16:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KG100601C1N4P@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Thu, 05 Mar 2009 08:27:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.56]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KG1002AZC1NEQ@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Thu, 05 Mar 2009 08:27:23 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 026B5A4F4 for ; Thu, 05 Mar 2009 08:27:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-mx-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BA93B84 for ; Thu, 05 Mar 2009 08:20:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (JACKFRUIT.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.201.16]) by a-lb-mx-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18DC9B83 for ; Thu, 05 Mar 2009 08:20:05 -0500 (EST) Received: from FARBERMAC.ISRI.CMU.EDU (FARBERMAC.ISRI.CMU.EDU [128.2.220.234]) (authenticated bits=0) by jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n25DK2Uc004400 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 05 Mar 2009 08:20:03 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 08:20:01 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Now why would they go and do THAT? To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: <67DDFAD2-79A8-4D23-9CC6-7CE4DC4B95AA@farber.net> MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.201.16 X-Listbox-UUID: 583618BA-0988-11DE-BFD7-4437E488361A X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 Begin forwarded message: =46rom: Randall Webmail Date: March 4, 2009 8:22:15 PM EST To: johnmacsgroup@yahoogroups.com Cc: dewayne@warpspeed.com, dave@farber.net Subject: Now why would they go and do THAT? Report: Diebold Voting System Has 'Delete' Button for Erasing Audit L= ogs By Kim Zetter EmailMarch 03, 2009 | 7:30:17 PMCategories: E-Voting Diebold_clear_button After three months of investigation, California's secretary of state = =20 has released a report examining why a voting system made by Premier = =20 Election Solutions (formerly known as Diebold) lost about 200 ballots= =20 in Humboldt County during November's presidential election. But the most startling information in the state's 13-page report = =20 (.pdf) is not why the system lost votes, which Wired.com previously = =20 covered in detail, but that some versions of Diebold's vote tabulatio= n =20 system, known as the Global Election Management System (Gems), includ= e =20 a button that allows someone to delete audit logs from the system. Auditing logs are required under the federal voting-system guidelines= , =20 which are used to test and qualify voting systems for use in =20 elections. The logs record changes and other events that occur on = =20 voting systems to ensure the integrity of elections and help determin= e =20 what occurred in a system when something goes wrong. "Deleting a log is something that you would only do in de-=20 commissioning a system you're no longer using or perhaps in a testing= =20 scenario," said Princeton University computer scientist Ed Felten, wh= o =20 has studied voting systems extensively. "But in normal operation, the= =20 log should always be kept." Yet the Diebold system in Humboldt County, which uses version 1.18.19= =20 of Gems, has a button labeled Clear, that "permits deletion of certai= n =20 audit logs that contain =97 or should contain =97 records that would = be =20 essential to reconstruct operator actions during the vote-tallying = =20 process," according to the California report. The button is positioned next to the Print and Save As buttons (see = =20 image above), making it easy for an election official to click on it = =20 by mistake and erase crucial logs. In fact, the report says, this occurred recently in a California = =20 county when an official, while attempting to print out a copy of a so= -=20 called "poster log," inadvertently deleted it instead. The system provides no warning to the operator that clicking on the = =20 button will result in permanent deletion of records in the log, nor = =20 does it require the operator to confirm the action before executing i= t. Apparently Premier/Diebold was aware that having a Clear button on it= s =20 system was a bad idea. According to California's report, one of the = =20 system's developers wrote in an e-mail in 2001: "Adding a Clear butto= n =20 is easy, but there are too many reasons why doing that is a bad idea.= " =20 Yet the company included the button in its system anyway. The button was removed from software versions 1.18.20 following, but = =20 Premier/Diebold never went back to jurisdictions using previous =20 versions to upgrade them, and version 1.18.19 is still used in three = =20 California counties as well as in other states. It's unclear how many= =20 previous versions of the software had the button, or why it was =20 included in the first place. According to the report: The Clear buttons ... allow inadvertent or malicious destruction = =20 of critical audit trail records in all Gems version 1.18.19 =20 jurisdictions, risking the accuracy and integrity of elections =20 conducted using this voting system. Five years after the company = =20 recognized the need to remove the Clear buttons from the GEMS audit = =20 log screens, not only Humboldt, San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara = =20 Counties in California but jurisdictions in other parts of the =20 country, including several counties in Texas and Florida, continue to= =20 use Gems version 1.18.19.... The report states that the inclusion of the button violated the =20 federal voting-system standards under which the Premier/Diebold syste= m =20 qualified to be used in elections. The standards require that voting-= =20 system software automatically creates and permanently retains =20 electronic audit logs of important system events that occur on the = =20 machine. Premier/Diebold did not respond to a request for comment. The Clear button isn't the only problem with the audit log in the = =20 Premier/Diebold system. Wired.com previously reported other issues = =20 with the logs =97 for example, they don't record significant events t= hat =20 occur in the tabulation system, such as when someone deletes votes = =20 =66rom the software. The California report states that the Clear button and other issues = =20 should have been a red flag to the testing laboratories that certifie= d =20 the system. The system should have flunked certification-testing and = =20 been banned from the election. Under the official voting-system standards, "each of the errors and = =20 deficiencies in the Gems version 1.18.19 software described in this = =20 report, standing alone, would warrant a finding ... of 'Total =20 Failure'," the report concludes. "Presumably some organization, some lab, looked at this system and = =20 decided they thought it complies with the standard," said Felten. = =20 "And, obviously, they were wrong. Any state that uses Gems should be = =20 looking at this seriously." It's unclear what the states currently using the Gems system will do = =20 now that they know their voting software does not create an adequate = =20 audit trail. California's secretary of state has scheduled a public hearing on = =20 March 17 (.pdf) to discuss the report and whether version 1.18.19 of = =20 Gems should be decertified in the state. That would force counties in= =20 the Golden State to upgrade to a different version. As for addressing the fundamental problems with the audit logs in all= =20 versions of the GEMS software, a spokeswoman for the secretary of = =20 state's office said only that the state sent the report to the federa= l =20 Election Assistance Commission to communicate the issue to election = =20 officials in other states. A spokeswoman for the EAC told Wired.com that the commission has no = =20 authority to address problems with voting systems that were tested an= d =20 qualified prior to 2002, when Congress gave the organization oversigh= t =20 responsibility. "There's no regulatory action that we could take," said EAC =20 spokeswoman Jeannie Layson. "But certainly ... [we] make sure that th= e =20 test labs and independent reviewers who look at the test reports are = =20 aware of all that information." The lab that was responsible for testing and qualifying Gems version = =20 1.18.19 with the Clear button is Colorado-based Ciber. In 2007, the = =20 lab was suspended from testing voting systems for not following =20 quality-control procedures and for failing to document that it was = =20 conducting all the required tests. But the EAC restored the lab's = =20 accreditation to test voting systems last year. Ciber did not respond to a call for comment about its examination of = =20 the Premier/Diebold system and its approval of the Clear button. The California report is the result of an investigation into what = =20 occurred in Humboldt County during the November 2008 presidential = =20 election. After the election, county officials discovered that their tabulation= =20 software had dropped 197 ballots without giving any notice to electio= n =20 officials that it was doing so. Humboldt uses a Premier/Diebold =20 central-count optical-scan system. The company acknowledged that a = =20 programming flaw in version 1.18.19 of Gems could drop votes when use= d =20 with a central-count scan system, and that it had known about the = =20 problem since October 2004. Premier/Diebold sent some election officials a workaround at the time= , =20 though Humboldt County election director Carolyn Crnich never receive= d =20 it. The company also never notified California state officials or the= =20 federal EAC so that election officials around the country could be = =20 notified. The flaw was fixed in May 2005. But until then, the vendor let =20 jurisdictions use five flawed versions of the software and never = =20 explained the problem or the workaround in user documentation. Diebol= d =20 has said that no jurisdiction outside California used these versions = =20 of Gems with a central-count scan system and therefore were not at = =20 risk from the flaw. California officials backed this claim in their = =20 report. Secretary of State Debra Bowen has sponsored legislation that would = =20 require a voting-machine vendor to notify the state in writing (.pdf)= =20 any time it discovers a problem with its voting system. The vendor = =20 would have to notify the state =97 and any California jurisdiction us= ing =20 the voting system =97 within five working days of discovering a flaw = in =20 software or hardware. The bill also requires a vendor to disclose any flaws it already know= s =20 about systems that are currently in use in the state. These reports = =20 will then be submitted to the EAC so that officials in other states = =20 will know about them as well. The bill provides for civil penalties o= f =20 $10,000 per violation against vendors for undisclosed flaws or for = =20 making unauthorized changes to a voting system. Kate Folmar, spokeswoman for the secretary of state's office, said = =20 Bowen hopes that the bill, if passed, "could become a model for other= =20 states for dealing with similar anomalies and problems that pop up = =20 with their voting systems." http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2009/03/ca-report-finds.html http://snipurl.com/d41uu -------------------------------------------   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Fri Mar 6 08:24:12 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KG300M016K8R6@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Fri, 06 Mar 2009 08:24:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KG300M016K3QT@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Fri, 06 Mar 2009 08:24:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KG100801ZZK8G@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Thu, 05 Mar 2009 17:04:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com [208.72.237.56]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KG1006ASZZK9M@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Thu, 05 Mar 2009 17:04:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by c-lb-ex-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3FDE94F1 for ; Thu, 05 Mar 2009 17:05:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1370B145CC for ; Thu, 05 Mar 2009 16:56:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (JACKFRUIT.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.201.16]) by a-lb-mx-quonix.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7804C145C8 for ; Thu, 05 Mar 2009 16:55:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.1.104] (c-71-206-239-18.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [71.206.239.18]) (authenticated bits=0) by jackfruit.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n25Lttsa025019 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 05 Mar 2009 16:55:56 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 16:55:55 -0500 From: David Farber Subject: [IP] Subpoena to Virginia Blogger for Notes and Identification of Anonymous Commenters To: ip Errors-to: Reply-to: dave@farber.net Message-id: <90E9DBEE-4ED1-4230-ADD3-9554FACEA7B2@farber.net> MIME-version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) Content-type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-transfer-encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE X-Scanned-By: mimedefang-cmuscs on 128.2.201.16 X-Listbox-UUID: 69E944E0-09D0-11DE-A380-6F55B4A18844 X-Listbox-List-ID: 247 References: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Help: List-Id: List-Software: listbox.com v2.0 Begin forwarded message: =46rom: "Paul Levy" Date: March 5, 2009 4:38:04 PM EST To: Subject: Subpoena to Virginia Blogger for Notes and Identification of= =20 Anonymous Commenters Together with the ACLU of Virginia and the Thomas Jefferson Center fo= r Freedom of Expression, we have intervened in the case mentioned a few days ago in which a plaintiff in a defamation case retaliated against= a blogger who covered his defamation suit in less than flattering terms= by sending a highly invasive subpoena that demands production of the blogger's communications with his sources, IP numbers of all who pos= ted on his web site or even READ the web site. There have been only a handful of cases in which courts have addressed whether bloggers shou= ld be treated as journalists for the purpose of considering the reporter= s' privilege. We are also arguing that, in addition to protecting the commenters on the blog for the reasons usually argued -- protecting their right of anonymous speech -- posters on a journalists blog shou= ld be treated as "sources" whose disclosure violates the journalist's ow= n rights. The brief can be found on our web site, URL is at the end of the following release: Paul Alan Levy Public Citizen Litigation Group 1600 - 20th Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20009 (202) 588-1000 http://www.citizen.org/litigation >>> Joe Newman 3/5/2009 4:25 PM >>> =46ROM PUBLIC CITIZEN, ACLU OF VIRGINIA AND THOMAS JEFFERSON CENTER For Immediate Release: Contact: Paul Alan Levy (202) 588-1000 Rebecca K. Glenberg (804) 644-8080 Josh Wheeler (434) 295-4784 =09=09=09=09=09=09 =09 Court Should Not Force Virginia Blogger to Surrender Notes or Identif= y Anonymous Comments Freedom of the Press Protects =91Non-Traditional=92Journalists Too WASHINGTON, D.C. - A Charlottesville blogger has the same rights as a mainstream journalist and cannot be forced to release his notes or identify people who posted anonymously on his Web site, Public Citize= n, the American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia and the Thomas Jeffers= on Center for the Protection of Free Expression said in a brief filed to= day in a Virginia circuit court. The same reporters privilege that protects newspaper and TV journalis= ts under Virginia law applies to Waldo Jaquith, who runs cvillenews.com, said Public Citizen attorney Paul Alan Levy, who represents Jaquith, along with Josh Wheeler of the Thomas Jefferson Center and Rebecca Glenberg of the ACLU of Virginia. Thomas Garrett, an author, actor, radio personality and self-describe= d Hollywood publicist, subpoenaed Jaquith=92s notes and Internet record= s after Jaquith wrote about a defamation suit Garrett had filed against The Hook, a Charlottesville alternative weekly. Garrett=92s subpoena seeks identifying information for anyone who posted comments about or even looked at Jaquith=92s blog entry on the suit. It also seeks any e-mails to or from Jaquith relating to Garrett or the defamation suit= , and any documents =93relating to information obtained, generated or created in writing the [cvillenews.com] article.=94 =93One of our country=92s founding values is that the person standing on the soapbox in the town square has the same freedom of speech they have at The New York Times or the Toledo Blade, for that matter,=94 L= evy said. =93Bloggers such as Jaquith may not be =91traditional=92 journalists but they play an integral part in the way people get thei= r news today.=94 The brief also argues that the subpoenaed documents are irrelevant to Garrett=92s defamation suit against The Hook. =93It is difficult to s= ee how comments that were written and posted nearly nine months after th= e alleged defamation took place could have any relevance to this sort o= f cause of action,=94 Wheeler said. Further, the brief argues that commenters on Jaquith=92s blog have a First Amendment right to do so anonymously and Garrett has provided n= o evidence on why they should be unmasked. =93If this subpoena is allowed to stand, bloggers will have to look over their shoulders whenever they write about a pending lawsuit,= =94 said Kent Willis, director of the ACLU of Virginia. =93The chilling effect could be devastating.=94 =09To read the brief, go to http://www.citizen.org/litigation/forms/cases/CaseDetails.cfm?cID= =3D524. ### Joe Newman Press Officer / Public Citizen 1600 20th Street NW Washington, DC 20009 (202) 588-7703 www.citizen.org Check out our blog: www.citizenvox.org Follow us on Twitter: http://twitter.com/Public_Citizen -------------------------------------------   From interesting-people-errors+interesting-people-2179+40archive+2Ewww+2Einteresting-people+2Eorg@www.interesting-people.org Fri Mar 6 08:24:13 2009 Return-Path: Received: from DD-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KG300M016K8R6@elistx.com> for interesting-people-2179@archive.www.interesting-people.org; Fri, 06 Mar 2009 08:24:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from D-IPEOPLE.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KG300M016K3QT@elistx.com> for interesting-people@direct.www.interesting-people.org (ORCPT interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org); Fri, 06 Mar 2009 08:24:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from CONVERSION-DAEMON.elistx.com by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) id <0KG200O019NQE1@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Thu, 05 Mar 2009 20:33:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from a-lb-ex-fastnet.listbox.com (zeppo.pobox.com [207.8.214.3]) by elistx.com (PMDF V6.3-2x2 #31546) with ESMTP id <0KG200LD19NQIR@elistx.com> for interesting-people@www.interesting-people.org; Thu, 05 Mar 2009 20:33:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-ex-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2442341 for ; Thu, 05 Mar 2009 20:33:49 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-lb-mx-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD0C6823 for ; Thu, 05 Mar 2009 20:32:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (CHOKECHERRY.SRV.CS.CMU.EDU [128.2.185.41]) by a-lb-mx-fastnet.listbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF2F1822 for ; Thu, 05 Mar 2009 20:32:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from [192.168.1.103] (c-71-206-239-18.hsd1.pa.comcast.net [71.206.239.18]) (authenticated bits=0) by chokecherry.srv.cs.cmu.edu (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id n261WGQH024549 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bit