241–250 of 281 posts
In maybe five to ten years, the internet will effectively split in two. There will be major, commercial service providers such as Facebook-type social media hubs, major news sites but there will also be an invisible internet that is everything internet used to be, and in addition to that encrypted, anonymous, and untraceable. How it shows most prominently at the moment is file sharing. Setting the endless copyright d…
In maybe five to ten years, the internet will effectively split in two. There will be major, commercial service providers such as Facebook-type social media hubs, major news sites but there will also be an invisible internet that is everything internet used to be, and in addition to that encrypted, anonymous, and untraceable. How it shows most prominently at the moment is file sharing. Setting the endless copyright d…
> I don't promote or demote filesharing per se: it's just the cutting edge where the future trends will show years before they land elsewhere and that's what it makes it so interesting. One interesting thing I've noticed that the people behind the best filesharing networks tend to have tremendous success with their later projects. Napster is the obvious one. After Napster went down, Shawn Fanning co-founded Rupture a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How on earth can you bring up diaspora in this context? Some kind of cruel joke? I'm downvoting parent and giving you the right link: https://freenetproject.org/
Heh, I probably should have said it's not an endorsement. Just another example of a (dubious) attempt at a distributed social network.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It may be sensitive, but have you ever tried to put in an FOI request for anything . The entire process is marred by bureaucracy. Wikileaks would have a role to play even if there were no classification system . Don't underestimate how hard it is to get a good historical record :-)
I actually supported Wikileaks (and thank god didn't donate!) back when they were publicizing public-but-not-popular information, like about corporate malfeasance, public government documents, etc. Which is partially why I'm so pissed at Julian Assange for hijacking it into a largely anti-US agenda. ("Collateral Murder" had a really obvious spin when released, which was intentional; if they'd just dropped the video w…
Have you seen the video? It has no commentary. It has subtitles. It has title screens. No commentary. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0
And how does that video have an anti-US agenda? It's recorded by US soldiers, it's illuminating a particular act on a particular day.
I think the public has a right to know, history has a right to know what goes on in Iraq.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I found your comment more insightful than the article.
It's not an article. It's a call to action, and also an advertisement.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd be interested to know what you think of the Cryptoparty 'movement', rdl? Eric Hughes talked in Amsterdam. Would you get involved?
It's too broad in scope for me to be really interested, I think -- meetings more focused on specific problems and solutions to those problems, vs. "the overall concept of cryptography and secure communications" seem more likely to be productive. There are really no shortage of events like this in the Bay Area. I think "how to help mainstream developers build and operate services securely" would be the only thing I'm…
In-fact if I look around the room, I'm the one talking about what William Binney has said & Echelon, so I'm probably the tin foil hat.
I agree about the focus. What's interesting is some of the bugs that I've found because I don't often see things from a UI perspective, and talking to end users has made me see some new bugs, also see problems that remain to be solved that I am currently working on.
I think the bay area is unique, there is nothing much of it's kind like this in Sydney.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is this a "fiction" and why do you need banks? Why do you dismiss Bitcoin? Please explain.
He's not dismissing Bitcoin, but the idea that through Bitcoin you can "remain a pair of anonymous public/private keys". This is explained here: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Anonymity (and yes, I know that the technology can theoretically support this, it just doesn't in its current incarnation).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your argument is a non sequitur: states are necessary, therefore states are not systems through which coercive force flows. I did not say that at all. I am OK with states being systems through which coercive force flows, because I think channeling and supervising said force usually results of less of it flowing than otherwise would. Can you imagine a state that doesn't wield violence? That's what a state is. It's har…
All kinds of organizations and people build infrastructure; churches and companies also promulgate laws and provide dispute-resolution forums. What distinguishes the state from other organizations that perform similar tasks is that the state holds a monopoly on (legitimate) violence. This is not a "narrow and immature" point of view; this is the normal definition. Quoting Wikipedia: The most commonly used definition…
In short, the authority of these private organizations are opt-out, while the authority of the state is not.
It's circular logic to say that a state has a monopoly on only legitimate violence since it's the same state which defines which violence is legitimate and which is not. Can you think of any organizations that successfully exercise a monopoly on illegitimate violence? Successful states do not allow such activities to continue for long.
A state is, as others have already said, simply a political institution which exercises a monopoly on violence and determines how to apply it within its political domain.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That would be impossible. How do you define and detect encrypted traffic? Sure it's possible to block a known encryption protocol such as https. But we would get creative if that happened.
If you want to become the next evil overlord, it's quite simple really. Whitelist known traffic.
very platonic, but totally oblivious to "rubber hose cryptanalysis" ...unless you have a group of fanatically loyal people at the core of your "freedom protectors" group and the "engineers" that implement your cryptography systems part of this group, force and bribery will always win. ...and if you have a group of people truly loyal to freedom, then you don't need much crypto anyway ...just spoken words, physical tra…