If the feds can get air traffic controllers in other countries around the world to down the Bolivian President's jet... I don't think they'd have any trouble getting into DefCon if they really wanted to.
Feds, We Need Some Time Apart
181–190 of 260 posts
Re: Feds, We Need Some Time Apart
#182Earlier quoted context omitted.
When is discrimination against an individual based on his or her employer detrimental to the good of humanity?
When is discrimination against an individual based on his or her employer detrimental to the good of humanity? Employers are kinda made up of the people that work for them. Any attempts to disassociate the two shall fail. So yes, humanity is better when people actually have experience consequences for their actions -- instead of hiding behind other people, or symbols even, like "employer". We're not talking about bei…
I think you might be reading into my words a bit too far. The Mafia is not a legal employer. Requiring someone to have a legal employer in order to buy a legal weapon makes sense. (Perhaps. Maybe it makes sense for them not to have an illegal employer.) At any rate the Mafia do not generally buy legal weapons. As for not letting somebody buy me a drink, that's not exactly organizational discrimination - it's more like personal discrimination - but not letting a certain class of individuals enter a bar based on their legal employment is. Personal discrimination is a lot murkier, and everyone does it to some degree.
I know that I didn't make the distinction between legal and illegal until later on, so maybe you didn't see it.
Re: Feds, We Need Some Time Apart
#183Earlier quoted context omitted.
So discrimination against employees is okay if you don't like the employer?
I don't see how this can be in question, if the employees chose their employer freely. How can one seriously oppose a corporate entity if one may not oppose the people who comprise the corporate entity. "Corporations are people, my friend".
If employees choose their employers freely, what are interviews for?
Re: Feds, We Need Some Time Apart
#184Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe if everyone signs a consent form at registration.
There is no registration at defcon, it's all anonymous. You hand them cash for a badge and a packet of info/stickers/cd and are on your way.
When you go to a paintball field, is there a complicated registration process, or is it just understood that paintball is played at this particular place? Whatever legal maneuvers the paintball field's management has to do, DefCon could do.
(I suspect the main objections to indoor paintball will come from the venue. Perhaps a less messy, but still humiliating, method can be used?)
Re: Feds, We Need Some Time Apart
#185Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's still a difference. When I am in a room, I contribute to the humidity of that room. Now imagine me turning on the faucet or boiling some water.... and then saying "I can't turn them off, it would make no sense, I would contribute to the humidity either way!". I'll just go ahead and say if people can't think at all, so that they only know the difference between "nothing exists" and "everything is the same", th…
Sure, there are degrees of contribution, and direct is clearly more intentioned than indirect, but at the end of the day the beast doesn't care if it's fed willingly or unwillingly, and the vast majority of government funding is involuntary. If it's going to die, it needs to be unable to feed, what people are willing to contribute is irrelevant when its primary income is violently coerced. I have thought long and har…
at the end of the day the beast doesn't care if it's fed willingly or unwillingly
I totally hear what you saying and as a matter of fact, I used to be very depressed by this. And maybe I'm being a coward. But I also think that billions of people need to be organized somewhat to live together, even millions or thousands. We need plumbing, we need roads, hospitals, and even taxes. To some degree, at least. I mean, come on, even though there are bad doctors, it's kinda cool that I can just look one up in the yellow pages and have a great chance of getting competent treatment. Or eat fast food without dying of salmonella or something. It's not perfect, but I don't want medieval times back either. Yeah, I'm probably a coward ^^
Still, to me the problem isn't so much that there is government, but that it's not a mechanism for people to govern themselves, but like something external we accept to be broken and our enemy, instead of us. That it's a shitty government, run by people who wanted to get in for all the wrong reasons - instead of by everyone, all the time. Mr. Taxman [1], who just lies to you before election and there is fuck all anyone can do.
As Chomsky said, governments have one "defect", they are theoretically democratic -- corporations have no defect, they're pure tyrannies. So unless you become some kind of super inventor / investor, and so rich that you and others of your calibre could really move things around, well.. you'd still have your voice I guess. And that might be enough, there are surely ways to not pay into the wrong hands and still affect people, so I'm not knocking it at all. If you can pull it off, good luck! And write a book/blog about it, too.
Re: Feds, We Need Some Time Apart
#186DefCon is a joke. Nobody with any skill takes that conference seriously. This is a complete farce as one of the key speakers last year was Gen Keith Alexander. NSA was fairly open about recruiting directly from DefCon and DefCon leadership had no problem with it. Anyone with even a slight security background could have predicted Prism and other programs just by the AT&T whistleblower from the mid 2000's. DefCon is ju…
Which conferences do you consider decent for someone with skills?
Re: Feds, We Need Some Time Apart
#187Earlier quoted context omitted.
The pump is not the only place that you pay for gas.
Yup, there used to be an old ad campaign--"If you have it, a truck brought it." And it's true--although with modern supply chains today we probably should also throw in ships, trains, and airplanes. Transportation costs are embedded in the cost of every physical good.
Trains are much less sensitive to fuel prices than trucks are.
The capital investment necessary to make trains work at all is really big. But after that the marginal cost of an additional car is very low. In terms of energy efficiency, trains are much better than trucks. What they lack is convenience, at least right now.
In terms of cost, trucks often win because the trucking company doesn't bear the burden of building/maintaining the highway system. Yes they pay fuel taxes, but trucks make basically all the wear on roads. Wear seems to be based on the fourth power of weight. Check this: http://facweb.knowlton.ohio-state.edu/pviton/courses2/crp776...
This is a common theme for basically everything having to do with energy efficiency. You can have low up-front cost and larger ongoing costs, or larger up-front costs and lower ongoing costs. In the case of trains the ongoing costs are similar at current fuel prices but once they double again you'll see more train cargo and less truck cargo.
Re: Feds, We Need Some Time Apart
#188Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is no registration at defcon, it's all anonymous. You hand them cash for a badge and a packet of info/stickers/cd and are on your way.
When you go to a paintball field, is there a complicated registration process, or is it just understood that paintball is played at this particular place? Whatever legal maneuvers the paintball field's management has to do, DefCon could do. (I suspect the main objections to indoor paintball will come from the venue. Perhaps a less messy, but still humiliating, method can be used?)
This is an absurd proposal, but given that the Rio won't let people running pubs in this years call for parties attach stuff to the walls (Can't find the link offhand, but it was in the submission info), I think it's safe to assume that paint guns inside wouldn't happen.
That said, that's the least important reason, the more important one being that you can't just nail people with any kind of gun at an infosec conference, no matter how unconf it is.
Re: Feds, We Need Some Time Apart
#189Earlier quoted context omitted.
>It's a booze-fueled learning, partying and networking event unlike any other Is there any way to get use out of it that doesn't include 'booze-fueled and partying'. I have no problem with booze, but I definitely dislike partying. Yes, I'm a wet blanket, but if the partying atmosphere is where the use comes from, I would seriously be uninterested. I know that actually does limit the networking part too.
>Is there any way to get use out of it that doesn't include 'booze-fueled and partying'. Sure, you can check out the talks, wander around the venue (CTF, vendor booths, etc), talk to people. The "partying" isn't as rampant as some may have you believe. Sure there are parties, but it's not like you will be dragged into one. They also appear to be non-inclusive. I know I wasn't invited to any last year (and I'm no wet…
I like all the competitions and games you can join before or during the con (check the forums for official contests etc). Hacker Jeopardy is by far my favorite con event. On Thursday there's the Atomic Barbeque, which is a great way to network with people and chow down. I don't know if they still do the Hacker Iron Chef, but that was fun to watch.
Getting into parties is half the fun! I remember the times I social engineered my way into the Ninja party. Humans are so insecure...
p.s. even if you don't drink, the quickest way to make friends at defcon is to give someone free alcohol. the goons also appreciate free beverages.
Re: Feds, We Need Some Time Apart
#190Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are confusing popularity with effectiveness. Ron Paul specifically had been talking for what, 20 years about auditing the federal reserve more than they were allowed. They finally got something through under someone else's name, but the victory was his. The reason is that Ron Paul and his like cannot push through something on his own. The entrenched interests are way too powerful.
> You are confusing popularity with effectiveness. No, I am saying this ineffectiveness is motivated by lack of genuine interest. They're just opportunists, no better than any other. His son is even more blatant about this, showing up at the last minute with tough questions when something is in the headlines, but not showing any signs of prior interest or following through. It gets him quoted in the news a lot, and a…
Ok