111–115 of 115 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> money buys technology I don't think it matters. He quickly noticed that the problem is cultural, that >> I’d much rather think about the question of exploit sales in terms of who we welcome to our conferences, who we choose to associate with, and who we choose to exclude, than in terms of legal regulations. I think the contextual shift we’ve seen over the past few years requires that we think critically about what’…
It is possible to believe both things at the same time: that dictatorships will inevitably acquire exploits, backdoors, and monitoring tools, and that it's unconscionable for companies to sell these things to dictatorships. The story is perhaps clearer on exploit markets. The alternative to markets is publication, which burns the vulnerability by hastening its patch deployment. Dictatorships will inevitably acquire m…
I'd sure rather deal with the current Saudi Government than with Al Qaeda. Yes, there are fairly bad elements within the government, and it is at best one of the more restrictive regimes in the world, but there are some alternatives that are worse.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Like Moxie says, money buys technology, and they will eventually find someone to rig up a workable solution for what they're trying to do. Governments are in a unique position here. They can always just move up the stack. Can't break the crypto? That's fine. They can just require the mobile phone companies to sell phones with spyware already included.
That problem is, I think, a showstopper for "anti-circumvention" tools like whatever- the- next- generation- of - Tor will be. Dictatorships have little to lose by backdooring or rootkitting devices; they'll laugh off any outrage stirred up by the discovery of these methods. But the economics flip around in Europe, Japan, the US, &c: governments there do have something to lose by surreptitiously backdooring huge numb…
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/the-world-from-b...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I humbly contend that forcing people to do anything in the name of an preserving the purity of an ideology is a Bad Idea.
Authors are giving their work away, subject to restrictions of their choosing. There's no coercion involved.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I humbly contend that forcing people to do anything in the name of an preserving the purity of an ideology is a Bad Idea.
Isn't it amazing how people come out of the woodwork to point out the force inherent in the GPL never say "oh, by the way, thanks for publishing a reference spec I'm free to use to develop my own code." As Thomas said, people would be less bitchy, and less holier-than-thou (cough), had Moxie not written any code, or written it and charged an arm and a leg for it. It's sort of what patio11 talks about. The cheaper the…