Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
It's funny.  Laugh. GNU is Not Unix

Richard Stallman Accosted For Tinfoil Hat 549

ndansmith writes "Bruce Perens posts in his blog about an amusing encounter between Richard Stallman and United Nations security at the World Summit on the Information Society in Tunis. It seems that RFID technology, which Stallman opposes for privacy reasons, was used in the identification badges for the conference. From the blog: 'You can't give Richard a visible RF ID strip without expecting him to protest. Richard acquired an entire roll of aluminum foil and wore his foil-shielded pass prominently.' During a keynote speech, Stallman also passed around the tinfoil for other to use as well. It seems that UN security was not amused, however, as they would not let him leave the room for some time." What makes this even funnier, of course, is that tin foil hats won't stop them.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Richard Stallman Accosted For Tinfoil Hat

Comments Filter:
  • by odweaver ( 914814 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @12:06PM (#14070664)
    Wasn't the whole point of the MIT article that aluminum amplifies and tin degrades signals?
  • by mr_da3m0n ( 887821 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @12:07PM (#14070671) Homepage
    But I think this was just a message he was trying to get accross. Now what I wonder is why the security didn't let him leave? OH NOES HE HAS TIN FOIL OVER BADGES!!1 Unless they had something to hide...?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19, 2005 @12:19PM (#14070714)
    I don't think he covered his tag in foil to block the radiation. It seems to me that it was more about sending the message that making him and others wear RFID tags was Not Cool.
  • by Mel ( 21137 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @12:19PM (#14070718) Homepage
    The guy has balls and he'll make a stand against what he believes in no matter how it looks. Sure, the tinfoil hat doesn't actually work, but it's a visible symbol that cannot be ignored. Without people like him making a visible protest on a forum that so many high-level people will notice, protests against tracking technologies are just pissing into the wind.

    Rock on Richard.
  • by external400kdiskette ( 930221 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @12:22PM (#14070734)
    Tin Foil is more symbolic and his intention was to make a visible stand against the technology in general as opposed to protect him personally. I guess this sybolic gesture he figured would resonate and give him more publicity for his crusade.
  • Re:The Hypocrisy (Score:3, Insightful)

    by iamacat ( 583406 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @12:23PM (#14070736)
    Yes, because BitTorrent can not be used for human trafficking or for keeping track of citizens' movements in a totalitarian state, such as one that considers copyright infringement to be more important than these things.
  • by Blakey Rat ( 99501 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @12:24PM (#14070746)
    It's a goddamned NAME BADGE! It's not the Illuminadi, it's not the "Pentaveret" or whatever the hell secret society you think is covering up UFO's. It's to identify which doors he should be able to unlock and which he shouldn't have access to. Millions of people were RFID name badges every day. Thousands of businesses require them. Why is everyone on Slashdot, a Linux-oriented website, so technophobic and paranoid? And half of the people posting here probably wear a RFID name badge to work, also.

    Look, there are legitimate reasons to oppose *some* RFID tags. For instance, RFID tags put on clothing which are not removed at purchase. But clowning like this only serves to distract from the real issue.
  • Their rules (Score:3, Insightful)

    by secolactico ( 519805 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @12:24PM (#14070747) Journal
    I think he would have made a better statement if he simply refused to attend the summit upon finding out that the tags had RFID.

    Having a covered up badge could be a breach of security, since not only did he cover the RFID (and not even that) but he covered the "visual part" of the badge.

    Of course, being a famous personality, that wouldn't be much of an issue, but what about the "crashers" that got a wad of aluminum and simply say that they were following RMS' advice?

    I admire RMS in this aspect. I wish I could do more to preserve our right to privacy. Nowadays, all I do is refuse the services of people who insist in gathering all kind of information in exchange of unrelated good/services (I just want to rent a movie, you don't need to know my yearly income of wether I have life insurance). But it's a losing battle.
  • Re:The Hypocrisy (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ScrewMaster ( 602015 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @12:25PM (#14070749)
    Not at all. The "major purpose" of Bit Torrent is to transfer large files efficiently. Bram Cohen intended that to be used for entirely legal purposes such as Linux distributions. The fact that, like most tools, it had wider application is completely irrelevant. You can break into someone's home with a screwdriver ... that doesn't make a screwdriver inherently evil.

    Bit Torrent and similar technologies simply give individuals more power. Yes, more power to do things that some organizations would rather they didn't do, but also more power to make their lives better as well. A trade-off, in other words, and one that (for once) is on the side of the many, rather than the few.

    Valid complaints about RFID are generally not "RFID rechnology is just inherently evil", but are oriented against governments and/or criminal organizations that would use it to hurt people. Yes, there are many legitimate benefits conferred by RFID tech, but those must be balanced against the potential for people to get hurt by them. Thoughtless dissemination of RFID technology (such as the U.S. State Department was all set to do with passports) will cause a lot more damage than it is worth.
  • by gkuz ( 706134 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @12:29PM (#14070773)
    The guy has balls and he'll make a stand against what he believes in

    I thought he was making a stand for what he believes in.

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @12:32PM (#14070788)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19, 2005 @12:32PM (#14070790)
    Tin isn't an alloy, it's an element.
  • by imlepid ( 214300 ) <kkinkaid@im[ ]id.com ['lep' in gap]> on Saturday November 19, 2005 @12:38PM (#14070823)
    Security people rarely have any idea what they are dealing with. The main reason why is they are simply given orders to "check an RFID badge" or "wave a wand around those people who set a metal detector off". They aren't paid to think critically or anything. This is often the charge levied by Schneier [schneier.com]. If we hired smart security people, overall we'd be more secure.
  • by Twid ( 67847 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @12:38PM (#14070824) Homepage
    The real story for this conference is the sad irony of having an information summit in Tunis, which violently suppresses freedom of expression [indexonline.org].

    You can read lots more stories here. [google.com] I'm pretty surprised the freedom-loving editors at slashdot didn't pick this up as a separate story, it's much more important than Stallman's RFID-tinfoil stunt.

  • by mrchaotica ( 681592 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @12:40PM (#14070835)
    The price of Freedom is eternal vigilance. -- Thomas Jefferson
    Hell yes, we worry about this, because it takes this level of concern to remain Free! Maybe the fact that you apparently don't care enough to complain is why your country is fucked up so bad! Have you ever considered that?!!
  • by mrchaotica ( 681592 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @12:43PM (#14070844)
    By definition, it doesn't work if you play by their rules. If he'd just chosen not to show up, nobody would care. Doing this, however, caused enough of a commotion that we're now reading about it on Slashdot. This is exactly what RMS WANTED to happen!
  • Re:brilliant... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Waffle Iron ( 339739 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @12:45PM (#14070846)
    nice, he makes a big ostentatious show of covering up his RFID strip with foil so "they" can't get at him, and of course all that happens is "they" make a big show of harassing him.

    This is exactly what he intended. If they hadn't harassed him, then the story wouldn't be in the news, and nobody would know about it. However, he knew that this would most likely cause some kind of stink, which would generated a news story that gets people talking about the issue. Now we're all here thinking about RFD, just as RMS wanted.

    RMS played the UN security like puppets on strings just the same way as terrorists play the administration and congress: they know what the knee-jerk reaction will be and they use it to their advantage.

  • by dysk ( 621566 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @12:47PM (#14070857)
    The real story for this conference is the sad irony of having an information summit in Tunis, which violently suppresses freedom of expression.
    Maybe it is good to bring people who believe in free speech to a place where it is lacking. Otherwise we're simply preaching to the choir.
  • by IdleTime ( 561841 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @12:47PM (#14070860) Journal
    But we all know that "security" is not really about security. It's about giving people a "feel-good" product that earns some people vast amounts of money.

    Most security is at best pathetic. Why? Because good security is expensive and sometimes invasive hence not acceptable by Joe Sixpack.

    Example of such feel-good "security" is what's going on at airports around USA. Best illustrated in Soul Plane [imdb.com]
  • Tinfoil (Score:3, Insightful)

    by PrimeNumber ( 136578 ) <PrimeNumberNO@SPAMexcite.com> on Saturday November 19, 2005 @12:59PM (#14070903) Homepage
    Although Stallman probably knew that tinfoil doesnt work, he was more likely trying to make a political point about RFID, which was a good thing IMHO.
     
    Personally I would have suggested that people go to the snack room and throw it in a microwave oven, that way it makes it a pain in the ass and costs those who want to implement this crap. Money is the only thing people like this understand anyway.
  • by Belial6 ( 794905 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @01:00PM (#14070904)
    It is extreamly common for people in authority to use other who have no say to deliver their messages. This is often done with the express purpose of pushing unreasonable requests on people, and creating exactly your feelings on anyone who complains. This is not just in government, but in jobs, and even in families.

    How many people have had a review, that included a "wage review", at work where they are told that someone not involved in the meeting, and unaccessable to the employee, is the final decicion on their raise. This was the same thing.

    So basically you are wrong. In most situations, being a jerk to the innocent guys just trying to do their job is the only way to get things changed. If your job is Henchman, expect to be treated like it.
  • by qeveren ( 318805 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @01:03PM (#14070914)
    You're missing the point entirely. He wrapped the badge in aluminum foil precisely to cause this reaction, because he wanted to get his point across to a wide audience of people.

    Complaining quietly and politely about certain kinds of issues just gets you swept under the rug and ignored.

    And since when should security be 'easier'? If security is easy then you're probably doing something wrong.
  • Re:Hmm (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19, 2005 @01:04PM (#14070917)
    No matter what your ideological position is, after seeing the UN in action you'll never really support them again other than in idea. It's a terribly broken and inefficient institution.
  • by joak ( 514399 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @01:13PM (#14070951)
    How is wearing tinfoil around a badge, and removing it when asked, being "a jerk to innocent guys?" Sounds to me like the confrontation is being caused by typical, officious guard behavior. Nor is it clear to me that he didn't protest the badge when it was handed to him--I don't know where you got that from.

    If you read Perens' account, you doubtless saw the UN (according to Perens, anyway) broke a promise not to use RFID cards at this year's protest--presumably in response to complaints last year to the "head of security" or some such. The options are presumably complain again, boycott the conference, or do some sort of symbolic protest. Boycotting in a hissy fit would be acting like a jack ass; complaining has proven to be useless; he chose the last option.

    I'm definitely not a Stallman fan (my impression of him is summed up by joking about killing an anti-Free Software spokesmen, then needing to explain to Perens that "he wouldn't really kill anyone.") But this two-bit protest became an issue because guards felt their manhood was being challenged.
  • by ndogg ( 158021 ) <the@rhorn.gmail@com> on Saturday November 19, 2005 @01:14PM (#14070957) Homepage Journal
    Stallman wanted to make a point, not actually stop the signal.

    To him, the message was more important than what it actually did.

    People more immediately understood the significance of wrapping it in tin foil than anything else.
  • by mw13068 ( 834804 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @01:18PM (#14070989)
    You don't seem to understand that the Free Software movement is a sociopolitical movement that cares more about freedom than about mainstream popularity. Strange concept in this day and age right?

    I respect RMS because he has never waivered from his ideals, even though people running "Linux", think he's a crazy person. He doesn't let fear of perception goad him into giving over his integrity. He and the FSF are not just trying to become popular, they're trying to protect your freedom and mine.

    IMO idealistic integrity is in too short supply in the world these days.

    So, it's great that you like "Linux", but remember that without RMS and the FSF and their allies, your "Linux" would not exist.
  • by Hurricane78 ( 562437 ) <deleted @ s l a s h dot.org> on Saturday November 19, 2005 @01:19PM (#14070999)
    > I seem to have missed the reasoning. Terrorism?

    As if you did not know that your government are trrorists... or at least henchmen of terrorists... (some of them are mentioned here: http://www.dilbert.com/comics/dilbert/shop/html/we asel_poll_results_2005.html [dilbert.com], for more just look at some stock indices...)
  • Re:Hmm (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Scrameustache ( 459504 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @01:36PM (#14071089) Homepage Journal
    No matter what your ideological position is, after seeing the UN in action you'll never really support them again other than in idea.

    I see what they do [msn.com], and what I see is hungry people being fed.

    So I guess your ideological position on starving folks is "let them eat cake"?
  • by Scrameustache ( 459504 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @01:44PM (#14071127) Homepage Journal
    It's a goddamned NAME BADGE! It's not the Illuminadi, it's not the "Pentaveret" or whatever the hell secret society you think is covering up UFO's. It's to identify which doors he should be able to unlock and which he shouldn't have access to.

    And they wouldn't let him leave the room!
    RTFA, he showed his badge whenever he had to get access to anything, he covered it up when he wasn't doing that, and they freaked.

    Tell me again why you don't think there's something more to their insistance on invisible, easily tracked mandatory ID? Remind me how it will be impossible for anyone with bad intentions to get access to the traces?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19, 2005 @01:47PM (#14071138)
    Actually the whole security paranoia and labelling people with chips, putting camera's everywhere etc. is a direct consequence of the dissolving of normal social relationships. Trust is then defined by external attributes and the authority to despense those attributes comes to lie within the hands of only a few. It's a threat to any free society. Ofcourse most people will rather go along with the herd and make themselves look good by parotting the cheap "haha look at that badly adjusted bearded idiot" stuff.
  • by mw13068 ( 834804 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @01:48PM (#14071140)
    Calling someone an especially undersocialized nerd is Insightful?

    Last time I checked, RMS spoke several languages, and has visited heads of state and thousands of people in many countries across the globe. Also, he seems to be the unwaivering center of a worldwide socio-political movement to protect your freedom and mine, sometimes at the cost of looking foolish to people who don't understand what he's doing.
     
  • by ultranova ( 717540 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @02:05PM (#14071212)

    I respect RMS. He's contributed a lot to the FOSS movement (but no, sorry, what I run is Linux). Several of his writings are thought-provoking. But on the other hand, we all want to see Linux become mainstream.

    Linux is mainstream. Mainstream does not mean number-one; mainstream means widely-used.

    Is this the image we want corporations to have about FOSS?

    The ideals of FOSS are far more important than the perceptions of any corporation about it. To quote a saying: "If you are willing to become evil in order to fight evil, why are you fighting it ?"

    If you are willing to give up everything that FOSS stands for in order to get it accepted as "mainstream", why do you even bother - it won't be Free or Open anymore then, so you can just use the proprietary products and save yourself the bother.

    One of its leaders childishly and purposefully gets in trouble with UN security for shielding his pass in aluminium foil. A movement led by immature pranksters. Is that the image we want?

    There is nothing childish or immature in demonstrating your viewpoint. No matter how much powers-that-be try to make you think so, playing by their rules and silently accepting defeat instead of using your brains to make a scene that gets everyones attention is not a sign of maturity; it is a sign of weakness and/or stupidity.

    Had Stallman played by their rules and simply refused to attend, or perhaps been given a special no-RFID ID card, they would have won; there would be no article here, no fuss risen over the use of RFID. Instead, Stallman played his own game, and drew attention to this issue. Stallman used his brains, and put up an effective fight; nothing immature in that.

  • by ndansmith ( 582590 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @02:10PM (#14071241)
    It's funny. Laugh.

    I oringally picked this up from Technocrat [tecnocrat.net], a slash site where Perens is an editor/author (I added that fact in the post but it was scrubbed by CowboyNeal). His headline was as follows:

    Richard Stallman gets in trouble with UN Security for wearing a tinfoil hat.

    I wanted to preserve his concept while still getting the story out to the greater Slashdot community. Perens wrote the headline knowing full well it was aluminum over his name badge. Here is how I interpert his intention, and why I did it how I did it.
    1. The difference between aluminum and tin foil is irrelevant. RMS was trying to make a point, and aluminum foil was all that was available.
    2. "Tinfoil" hat was was indicative of its function, not position. Or perhaps this will help: he put a tinfoil hat on his badge. Anyway, the location of the foil is not the point of RMS's action nor Perens' post.
    3. It's funny. Laugh.

  • by stefgosselin ( 906403 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @02:21PM (#14071285)
    I second you on that, Mr Stallman is sort of a hero, to me and being a bit eccentric goes with his personnality, me thinks. Thank god there are people like him to confront major 'decision-makers' on issues that the VAST majority of human beings take for granted.

    Issued that will have an impact maybe decades from now, Mr Stallman for sure has made history with an A+. He HAS made this world a better place. I strongly believe Mr Stallman's crusades DO make a difference, and we need more people like him, in this world to balance things out.

    Freedom of speech. Identity protection. Not even mentioning his unbelievable track record as a programmer.

    My own 2 cents. Sorry for grammar mistakes no english spellchecker on this box *yet
       
  • Tin foil (Score:3, Insightful)

    by hkb ( 777908 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @02:25PM (#14071299)
    I reckon RMS didn't actually care if the tin foil worked or not, it, to me, was an obviously symbolic thing.
  • by frdmfghtr ( 603968 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @02:27PM (#14071311)
    (All quotes from Bruce Perens' blog, http://perens.sourcelabs.com/ [sourcelabs.com])

    You can't give Richard a visible RF ID strip without expecting him to protest. Richard acquired an entire roll of aluminum foil and wore his foil-shielded pass prominently. He willingly unwrapped it to go through any of the visible check-points, he simply objected to the potential that people might be reading the RF ID without his knowledge and tracking him around the grounds. This, again, is a legitimate gripe, handled with Richard's usual highly-visible, guile-less and absolutely un-subtle style of non-violent protest.

    I'm not quite sure I understand why RMS felt that the RFID was a violation of his privacy. It's a SECURITY BADGE. It's whole PURPOSE is to identify the wearer. If he didn't want to wear it, then he shouldn't have attended the event.

    I disagree that it's a "legitimate gripe." Remember, he wasn't out on a public road somewhere, but in a "what I suspect is) a secure facility. Furthermore, if somebody really DID want to track him, they would just have somebody watch him the entire time. Believing that somebody wants to track your every motion is either a sign of paranoia or an overinflated sense of self-importance.

    All of this completely disrupted the panel that was supposed to follow ours in that room, and the folks operating that panel were rightly furious... ..So, this was no doubt an interesting problem for the security folks, who had no real idea who Richard was except that he was someone reasonably distinguished who was visibly violating their security measure.

    So he makes his point and disrupts the schedule of other panels. Great--this leaves the impression that "Others be damned, I'll make my point however I damn well please." That will earn you a lot of respect. And before you point out that it was the UNU security personnel who caused the ruckus and not Stallman, re-read the account. He was VIOLATING A SECURITY MEASURE. What do you expect them to do? He's violating a security measure that they are there to enforce.

    I didn't see anyone further molesting Richard, but I'd imagine he was followed around by plainclothes agents for the rest of the day. This, however, may not be unusual. Perhaps Kramer even got his own protective detail.

    See above.

    I could just be ignorant of RFID, or misinterpreting Stallman's point of view, but he does seem to be a bit "over the top" in terms of making his opinion known to the public at large. He's 100% entitled to his opinion, but there is a point where making one's point and the cacophony that comes with it washes over the actual issue at hand. What will be remembered more, the RFID issue or that Stallman caused a commotion at a UN event?
  • Re:Hmm (Score:1, Insightful)

    by raddan ( 519638 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @02:27PM (#14071312)
    They may feed starving people, but when those people are being massacred [wikipedia.org], they look the other way. In my opinion, the UN has proved not only to be incompetent, it's proved to be dangerous. It seems to bring out the worst in its member countries.
  • by Doc Ruby ( 173196 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @02:33PM (#14071333) Homepage Journal
    Even when you look at Stallman's insistence on naming a popular OS "GNU/Linux", not just "Linux", you see he's both right, and ahead of his time. Projects like Debian Solaris [gnusolaris.org], Mac OSX, and other kernels made into OSes with GNU apps make the important distinction operative. Yet of course Stallman was ridiculed by hordes of nerds for insisting on the distinction. Socialization is relative to the society, and an "undersocialized nerd" is often an ubersocial geek that chattering nerds can't understand.
  • Re:if (Al == Sn) (Score:3, Insightful)

    by spauldo ( 118058 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @02:37PM (#14071347)
    It's similar to people calling refrigerators "iceboxes". Back in the day, before aluminum was cheap, people used tinfoil. Aluminum foil became the standard, but people kept calling it tinfoil because that's what they'd called it all their life.

    Kind of like how some people call any tissue "Kleenex" no matter who manufactured it. Or sheetrock, for that matter.
  • Re:brilliant... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sploxx ( 622853 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @02:40PM (#14071361)
    RMS played the UN security like puppets on strings just the same way as terrorists play the administration and congress: they know what the knee-jerk reaction will be and they use it to their advantage.

    With the small but important difference that RMS did not harm or kill anyone. Makes it easy to sympathize with him and his cause, which is not possible with terrorists.

  • Re:Oh Please... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19, 2005 @02:53PM (#14071432)

    Or how they are trying to get the US to renovate the UN building in NYC and expecting to spend about a billion extra to do so (American Tax Dollars)

    The USA is 1.3 billion dollars in arrears. [wikipedia.org] How about you start paying what you owe before whining about it?

    If the UN was so great, why the hell didn't they send in troops, kick the crap out of the warlords in Zimbabwe and Somalia (no official government to speak of) and then rebuild the crumbled societies?

    Yeah, that's it. An organisation whose primary purpose is to stop war should invade countries! You must be American.

  • by bs_02_06_02 ( 670476 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @03:06PM (#14071497)
    "Smart" people are easy vicitims of social engineering. People who follow orders often are not. I think a good mix of both is necessary to have good security.
  • by jjh37997 ( 456473 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @03:08PM (#14071507) Homepage
    People.... this can be a good thing. The rich, powerful or corrupt have always had the power to invade our privacy because it's just an illusion and will alway be so. Privacy laws just protect the powerful from being watched by the masses.

    Instead of fighting a lossing battle to stop this technology we need to ensure that it will be available to everyone and that the information will be open to the public. Put cameras on the streets, in the police stations and in government buildings. Build cheap RFID readers that everyone can own. I don't mind being watched as long as I can watch everyone else. Imagine a world where everyone is equipped with their own personal cameras and recording devices... with so many eyes spreading their light everywhere the world might become a more peaceful and happy place.
  • by 2nd Post! ( 213333 ) <gundbear@pacbe l l .net> on Saturday November 19, 2005 @03:11PM (#14071518) Homepage
    I think you don't understand rfid.

    Imagine if your next credit card used rfid, or your passport, or your driver's license.

    I'm not quite sure I understand why RMS felt that the RFID was a violation of his privacy. It's a SECURITY BADGE. It's whole PURPOSE is to identify the wearer. If he didn't want to wear it, then he shouldn't have attended the event.

    RFID's purpose is not to identify the wearer; like Windows RPC, it's purpose is to be usable in a remote, rather than immediate, manner.

    Imagine then bombs that blow up when it detects more than 10 US rfid passports in its vicinity.
    Imagine thieves using rfid sniffers to 'borrow' your credit card when you stand behind them in line.
    Imagine someone stealing your identity with your credit card and drivers license while at the DMV renewing your car's registration.

    Stallman just made a point of uncovering his badge at doors to allow him access, but covering the badge when not in use to protect his privacy. Wouldn't you do the same with your credit cards, driver's license, and passport?
  • Re:Oh Please... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by rblum ( 211213 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @03:11PM (#14071521)
    Little good the League of Nations did to prevent WWII

    Of course, one might want to make the argument that it didn't have the leverage to prevent it because the US never joined.. But let's not have facts get in the way of a good UN bash, right?
    Donald Trump testified for over a half hour on just how screwed up the UN was when it came to construction costs and project planning.

    How often did Trump go bankrupt? That makes him an expert on projection cost and project planning how?
    Afghanistan was more interested in growing opium then food
    ... after having been enticed to get into the trade by the CIA ...
    Zimbabwe is refusing to let the UN build housing for people whose homes the warlords destroyed.

    And that makes it the UN's fault how?

    Look, the UN is not perfect, but it's better than any other option. Sort of like democracy.
  • Re:Hmm (Score:2, Insightful)

    by ZSO ( 912576 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @03:15PM (#14071539)
    I won't speak for HoboMaster, but I certainly think so, and I resent the appeal to intimidation Bogtha made [slashdot.org] when he said "only trolls and ignorant people could claim that the UN is not worth supporting."

    The UN lacks standards - it gives the most disgusting regimes the dignity of a soapbox, all for the sake of "neutrality." Whatever good they do for the poor is eclipsed by the sanction they give to the world's murderers.
  • You remind me of a finicky hairdresser who complains bitterly about how awful Einstein's hair looks and wondering how anybody could possibly take him seriously when he hasn't even bothered to look at the latest fashion magazine.

  • Re:Hmm (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Malor ( 3658 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @03:45PM (#14071712) Journal
    Measuring UN performance by number of people fed is almost exactly like measuring an IT team's performance by number of trouble tickets closed.

    A truly great IT team will have very few tickets to close in the first place.

    If the UN were really working, we wouldn't have that many starving people to feed.

    All you have to do, to decide not to support the UN, is to read its Bill of Rights. The UN Bill of Rights is straight out of Animal House. (Every clause reads, "you have the right to XXX, except when we decide you don't.").

    If the US, with its very clearly written Constitutional protections, can be corrupted as badly as it has been, expecting the UN to last more than about 20 years with real power is optimistic to the point of foolishness.

    There have got to be better ways to use that money.
  • It's Sad..... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by schlick ( 73861 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @03:49PM (#14071741)
    It saddens me that so many here don't seem to understand a simple but very important concept behind Stallmans protest. It was a catch-phrase in the '60s. I was born in the '70s, but I guess I'm lucky that it was effectively taught to me.

    I wish I could make this huge:

    QUESTION AUTHORITY!

    That is all RMS was doing. And when he did put the question to them we saw their reaction. It scares me, the number of people who think the UN's reaction was appropriate.
  • Re:Oh Please... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Scrameustache ( 459504 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @04:05PM (#14071821) Homepage Journal
    they are trying to get the US to renovate the UN building in NYC and expecting to spend about a billion extra to do so (American Tax Dollars).

    I hadn't read any details about the renovation project, so I checked it out. That billion "American Tax Dollars" you talked about? It's a loan [globalpolicy.org], with 5.54 per cent interest!
    the United States Congress had approved the loan offer of $1.2 billion to finance the costs of the project.
  • by killjoe ( 766577 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @04:05PM (#14071825)
    He educated you. He is expecting you to educate the masses.
  • by NeutronCowboy ( 896098 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @04:13PM (#14071847)
    As a security measure, I'm going to attach an explosive collar to your neck, complete with tracking system and personal identification. If you want to high jack a plane and crash it into a tower, we'll just blow the collar. If you do not, you will be completely safe.

    Do you get the problem now? Security measures should not be accepted just because they are security measures. Lawcritters will make stupid rules, and it is everyone's job to keep a watchful eye on the lawcritters to make sure that they don't pass these laws. Unfortunately, in this day and age, it sometimes requires some disruptive antics to get your point properly across - not only to the lawcritters, but also to everyone involved.

    Kudos to Stallmann for standing up for his beliefs in a non-violent, yet visible and effective manner. We need more people like him.
  • by shish ( 588640 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @04:35PM (#14071954) Homepage
    What if you're doing something morally right, but illegal, or socially unpopular?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19, 2005 @04:51PM (#14072040)
    When are you going to step up to the plate and be one of those smarter security guards?

    When they pay more than being an assistant "manager" at McDonalds, perhaps?
  • by slashdotnickname ( 882178 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @04:52PM (#14072046)
    If we hired smart security people, overall we'd be more secure.

    And also broke. Smart people can get better paying jobs.

    This tin foil guy was looking for attention, and he got it.
  • by ZachPruckowski ( 918562 ) <zachary.pruckowski@gmail.com> on Saturday November 19, 2005 @04:52PM (#14072047)
    But this two-bit protest became an issue because guards felt their manhood was being challenged. I work with the programs office at my college, and I often staff events. When you are working an event as security you are given very vague instructions (even from professional security companies). If something not covered comes up, you have two choices.

    1) Let it go and assume the guy is basically honest
    2) Stonewall and refuse.

    Basically, if you stonewall and refuse, and you're wrong, at worst you get yelled at. If you let the guy get away with something that may or may not be OK, and he causes trouble as a result, it's your ass. The environment is set up such that an honors student at a top college is still going to want to stonewall as the safer thing to do, or at least pass the buck. It's not a question of the guard's pride or even intelligence, it's a "Cover Your Ass" thing.
  • by r00t ( 33219 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @05:01PM (#14072078) Journal
    Well, yeah.

    The human mind is meant to handle a tribe. We can keep track of a small group of people, knowing who can be trusted and who to be wary of.

    Now we have cities with millions of people and transportation that takes us everywhere. Every day, we are faced with people we don't know.

    We're struggling. Our tribal brains can't keep track of all the people we meet.
  • by killjoe ( 766577 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @05:05PM (#14072097)
    He is educating you by showing you exactly how far the authorities are willing to go. This was just a name badge for god's sake and he removed the foil when going through checkpoints and they still detained him. I knew about RFID but I didn't realize how serious people were going to be about it.

    He also educated me by showing an easy and effective way to make the point. He showed how it was possible to make them look stupid while obeying their orders.

    Of course the mass media are going to call him a crackpot. Do you really expect anything else? The same mass media that called John Kerry a coward and accused him of shooting himself, the same mass media that called martin Luther king a communist, the same mass media that called the beatles communists, that same mass media that called kiss satanists for gods sake. The mass media will try to destory anybody who is popular and will try to demean anybody who is fighting for change.

    The powers that be use the media to try and lable people who oppose them as communists, crackpots, terrorists, haters of america and freedom, cowards and whatever other phrase is pushing the buttons of the ignorant masses that week. If you want to make a difference you can't let the press calling you a crackpot stop you.

    So what are you going to do other then calling him a crackpot that's what I want to know. You certainly seem to be content with joining the chorus of the chattering masses in calling him names rather then discussing the points he is trying to make with your parents or neighbors.

  • by sl956 ( 200477 ) * on Saturday November 19, 2005 @05:14PM (#14072143)
    Why exactly should we be carrying 25% of the total cost of the UN?
    It is not 25% anymore, it is 24%: the U.S. asked for a rebate a few years ago.
    We are one of 185 countries.
    This is a stupid metric: do you really think that East Timor (2004 GDP: $370,000,000) should pay the same amount as the U.S. (2004 GDP: $11,750,000,000,000)?
    The US I doubt has 25% of world economic output
    The US GDP was 21.17% of the world GDP in 2004.
    Every other rich country pays a little bit more than its fair share to compensate for countries in civil war or deep economic crisis. Japan for instance is paying 19% of the budget for less than 10% of the global GDP, Gernany 8% of the budget for less than 5% of the global GDP and so on. So with 24% of the budget for 21.17% of the global GDP, the U.S. contribution seen as a share of its GDP is already the lowest of all developped countries: in raw dollars, the U.S. assessments of $440,000,000 is 0.0037% of its GDP when Japan for instance pays $346,000,000 i.e. 0.0092% of its GDP. So you personally are contributing almost 3 time less of your annual incomes to the U.N. than a japanese or me in Europe.
    so I can't determine any other reason other than "the US should pay".
    What about "everyone except the US has already paid its (proportionaly larger) share"?
    If the U.S. was at least paying 21.17% of the budget instead of 24%, the complaints would not be so loud. The problem is that the U.S. has not even paid half its commitments for 2004, and not even 15% of its due for 2005 (that is less than 4% of the U.N. budget). In contrast, every other major contributor has already fully paid 2004 and 2005.
    If you aggregate the effective payements made on the last 12 months, the U.S. is only the 6th contributor to the U.N. budget, behind Italy (2.89% of the world GDP)!
    Here are the hard and daunting data (remember you asked for it):
    http://www.globalpolicy.org/finance/tables/reg-bud get/large05.htm [globalpolicy.org]

    Why do you think U.S. officials always speak of the assessments (never the payments)?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 19, 2005 @05:52PM (#14072300)
    He can be all of that and still be under-socialized and a nerd.
  • Doe eyed innocence (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Eol1 ( 208982 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @05:54PM (#14072309) Homepage Journal
    "The UN has a huge positive effect on the world."

    And you sir are naive or haven't had much first hand experience with the other half of the UN, its military wing. I have now worked and lived in 3 war zones for the last 10 years. I have dealt first hand with the UN police keeping operations in all 3 (Kosovo, Bosnia, Iraq). You will NEVER see anybody more corrupt or corrupting than the UN. Take UNMUC for example. You take police from corrupt 3rd world UN members and send them to even more corrupt war torn countries where they both:

    a) Teach the local cops how to be even more corrupt and extort the locals even more.

    b) Directly extort the locals themselves.

    In addition many of the UNMIC police have direct access to organized crime back home and often setup trade links in the war torn country they are supposedly helping (often coordinating human, weapon, and drug channels between the domestic and foreign crime rings).

    Or shall we talk about the peace keepers themselves? The peace keepers who are used to getting their own way back home and rape and extort the locals who they are suppose to be peacekeeping. Or take bribes to rough up one side or the other. Google away, you will find numerous references to this from all over the world.

    Or shall we talk about the UN staff in charge of rebuilding the countries? 1st world doe eyed dogooders who spent their nights getting high, drunk, and partying in local sex clubs. Or the old jaded former dogooder managers who just fuck children on a regular basis while embezzling UN funds to fund their illicit activities and retirements. Or do you mean the 3rd world members who join so they can compete with the jaded 1st worlders who can be more corrupt.

    "It strikes me that, of the people who are wholly negative of the UN, the vastly majority are from the USA ... ignorant people could claim that the UN is not worth supporting. "

    I personally find the only people that support the UN are people who have never first hand had to deal with them down range (not their nice 1st world NY and Geneva offices) on a daily basis, never seen how they have this annoying habit of causing more damage than not, prolonging the amount of time the locals suffer and citizens of 3rd world countries who are just embittered they belong to a failed nation and look for the UN to balance / counteract their betters.

    Let me guess, you are a western european living in one of your Ivory Towers like so many of your peers. Try getting out and seeing the world for what it is, dirty, nasty, and corrupt. Just like the UN.
  • by brassman ( 112558 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @06:51PM (#14072516) Homepage
    If we hired smart security people, overall we'd be more secure.

    The game theory on that is not so simple. Smart is a loaded word, for starters. It's more about personality than intelligence. Someone who is sharp, or excitable, or energetic is often viewed as "smart." The thing is, "quick-witted" people tend to use their imaginations and project into situations rather than climbing those stairs and twisting that doorknob on EVERY round of the building. Less-imaginative people may, in some circumstances, be less vulnerable to a smooth line of BS.

    Someone who is dull and stolid but believes in doing their rounds faithfully is more generally useful in real-world security than a "007" type who gets bored and/or distracted easily.

    An ordinary smart person will figure out how to "crib" during the boring times... which means no security at all. We need the kind of smart person who can suck it up and stay alert even though he knows he can get away with sleeping on the job 9,999 times out of ten thousand, just because number 10,000 could involve anything.

  • by mw13068 ( 834804 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @06:52PM (#14072522)
    If you follow Stallman doctrine, then you are less free than me because I have the freedom to choose open source or closed source.
    No. I still have the freedom to chose free or proprietary (even though I probably wouldn't choose the latter). So we're even there. But if you choose a proprietary package, and I choose a free package then I then have more freedom than you do. Now if there is no corresponding free package to any given proprietary package, I still have the freedom to not chose to use any package at all. My short-term ability to do certain tasks with my computer may be reduced, but then I could always write a program to do what the non-free software does, or hire someone to write it. Wereas you cannot make a non-free program free, nor is it likely that you would be able to pay the non-free software maker to give you your freedom back. You just need to think of your freedom on a broader level. That's level is where RMS and the FSF is at, so most people don't grok the significance.
  • by mw13068 ( 834804 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @06:58PM (#14072548)
    The man is quite simply incapable of functioning in standard human society
    Let's assume that you and I *are* capable of functioning in a "standard human society." Then, lets put his acheivements and yours and mine on a list side by side. Would you still stand by your statement then? Could it be that you simply don't like him for some reason, and therefore dismiss him and his methods and acheivements?
  • by 2nd Post! ( 213333 ) <gundbear@pacbe l l .net> on Saturday November 19, 2005 @07:33PM (#14072685) Homepage
    Stand by your original statement, and I will stand by mine:
    RFID is not about security; RFID is about remote access.

    That it can be USED for security is nice, but it also requires diligent design to ensure it cannot be misused in other ways.

    He was not, in any nominal sense of the word, violating security procedures by wrapping his badge in foil. He unwrapped it any time he needed to enter a 'secure' area, thereby validating his identity.

    Let's put it this way: If you picked up his badge and used it to enter/access secure areas, how is it a 'security' badge when you just used it to violate security?

    The badge isn't designed for security. It is first and foremost designed for convenience; to be access remotely, to identify the badge itself, and to display the security access of the wearer.

    It is NOT designed to make the wearer safer, nor is it designed to make he conference/rooms/vicinty safer.

    If they had stripped out the RFID capability, he would not have wrapped it in foil; his point in doing so was to highlight the fact that because it allowed remote access, it was actually an insecurity badge because it violated the wearer's security without promoting the security of the conference. A magnetic swipe card with thumbprint sensor + bioelectric power and picture would have been a security card; this was an insecure feature tacked onto a picture ID.
  • by some guy on slashdot ( 914343 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @08:56PM (#14072987)
    You're right. As ethical people, we should certainly bail out of any organization that shows signs of corruption. Except that of course, as an American, this would require me to support scrapping my own government. Instead, don't you think we should try to weed out the corruption to save the better parts of the organization? The bits that are sheltering orphans and leading peacekeeping forces?

    I'm not saying that this is your argument, but it certainly seems to be the President of the United States' argument. He and many of his proponents are in favor of just ignoring them entirely, throwing away all the good the UN does in spite of its corruption. But I'll tell you a secret: the head USians don't want to be rid of the UN because it is corrupt. They want to be rid of the UN because it isn't their kind of corrupt.
  • by Wile_E_Peyote ( 805058 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @10:09PM (#14073218)
    Freedom of speech. Identity protection. Not even mentioning his unbelievable track record as a programmer.

    While I do applaud anyone that makes freedom of speech and identity protection an issue. I fail to see what this has to do with personal freedom?

    Why shouldn't a place like the U.N. have this type of security in place? Especially since many of the people in the building are perfect political targets?

    His little protest would make more sense if he was protesting them using the chips in a super market or on credit cards. Pulling this kind of stunt in the U.N. really just makes him look like he belongs in the tin-foil hat club and thus makes his message seem like it comes from the tin-foil hat club. Definately not the best way to get an important (IMHO) message out.

  • by mw13068 ( 834804 ) on Saturday November 19, 2005 @10:55PM (#14073379)
    I put the word "Linux" in quotes in my posts to indicate (perhaps not very well) that the parent post uses the term Linux to mean the entire OS, which I believe is incorrect.

    You're right. The Linux kernel was not developed by GNU, but when most people say/write "Linux", they're talking about GNU/Linux.

  • by Total_Wimp ( 564548 ) on Sunday November 20, 2005 @02:42PM (#14076613)
    But we all know that "security" is not really about security. It's about giving people a "feel-good" product that earns some people vast amounts of money.

    Standard security personnel may not be especially useful at catching highly intelligent bad guys, but, thankfully, many (most?) of the bad guys do not fall in the "highly intelligent" category.

    In regards to U.S. thieves, I've said for years, "if they're not smart enough to get a job, what makes them think they're smart enough to get away with theft?" For every stupid security guard story you hear, the papers are chock full of stories of thieves that are lucky to have not killed themselves brushing their teeth that morning. You add in drug use and these guys are at a serious disadvantage.

    Personally I think that the better security you get, the more natural selection will breed even better criminals. But those guys will still be in the minority. Luckily, due to the nature of criminal behavior there will always be many left that are so stupid even the laziest, least trained, most dull-witted security guards will be able to catch them.

    TW

8 Catfish = 1 Octo-puss

Working...