Because they used a static rather than a random value it is specifically possible to calculate the private keys. Which the group did.

> what revenue is affected by a bunch of 3 year olds singing a copyrighted song?

None

> What revenue is due?

None. You're missing his point that there are absolutely no fees due when they are singing the songs, only when they're photocopying the sheet music.

Thanks. Didn't know English usage of the word went so far back - Kindergartens it is.

According to https://www.gema.de/presse/aktuelle-pressemitteilungen/presse-details/article/singen-erwuenscht-illegales-kopieren-verboten.html they are not targeting the education system as a whole.

Kindergartens in Germany aren't part of the education system as such, and are funded by churches, communities, NGOs, and other entities. They do not fall under the umbrella of the education system in relation to the government.

Schools aren't targeted for these reproduction fees because a "general contract" has been made between the Ministry of Culture (which is at the upper end of the education system) and the copyright holder, so everything is blanket covered.
Since Kindergartens are not under the Ministry of Culture they are not covered by the blanket contract, and have to pay 56 Euros for every 500 copies, or 44.80 Euros after the rebate if they are carried by a church or community.

Of course that's a GEMA press release, so it's going to paint things in their favor.

On a sidenote, typing Kindergartens feels stupid. Kindergaerten doesn't seem right in English, though. What's the proper plural here?

Got a link for that? Sorry to ask for citation, but this: https://www.gema.de/presse/aktuelle-pressemitteilungen/presse-details/article/singen-erwuenscht-illegales-kopieren-verboten.html press release by GEMA (in the original German) explicitly says that in this case they have been tasked by the VG Musikedition (an entity completely separate from GEMA) with enforcing the licensing of reproduction of song lyrics and sheet music. VG Musikedition has absolutely nothing to do with performance, which contradicts your statement that singing out loud in class is performing, and that performing is covered by the same rules. Since VG Musikedition doesn't deal with performances at all, performing cannot possibly be covered by the same rules, and it would be impossible to ask for a fee for performance tomorrow under the same statutes.

I'd appreciate any corrections.

Performance is free. Only reproducing sheet music (and, I guess, copying tapes or CDs) is not.

> What's next, should Dr. Suess's estate begin sueing kindergartens because they read his books aloud? Clearly this is a performance of his written work. What about when teachers show movies in class? Presentation of those films outside of home use is not allowed. (We're talking about showing movies on half days / Christmas time not the educational ones).

What about photocopying Dr Seuss books?

Again - performance of sheet music is free. Reproducing it costs a license fee.

Reading a book would be free. Reproducing it would cost a fee.

Well, humming doesn't require paying. Neither does singing.
Reproducing sheet music does.
> The new rules came into power at the beginning of this year, but have only recently drawn attention as daycare centers have received letters reminding them that they need to sign contracts with GEMA before distributing sheet music to children to sing.

> If copies of music are made, the fee needs to be paid.
> GEMA said that the need for licenses would not have any effect on singing in kindergartens.
> "It doesn't cost anything to sing in kindergartens," said Peter Hempel. "If a school does not make any copies of music, then of course they don't need to pay anything."

While GEMA is bullshit, much like the RIAA, photocopying sheet music is a far cry from kids singing a song.

> If VDI (virtual desktop infrastructure) is so great, then why aren't you using it?

Eunice isn't saying that, he's quoting Brian Madden as saying so and then gives his opinion on why he thinks they sooner or later will.

You can tell because of the sentence directly before the one quoted above:

>Virtualization analyst Brian Madden asks an excellent question:

But hey, fuck accurate summaries, right?

The whole point of the EFF is to think about such problems and issues before they become common; hence the 'frontier' in their title. They are trying to alert people to a potential situation so that people can be aware of it and start thinking about the implications, and formulate either consumer strategies or legal frameworks before there is wide spread abuse.

Your point is still valid in that you yourself may not be interested until there has been abuse, but to ask the EFF not to write about it until that point does not make much sense.

The advantage ARM has over x86 is that is much more efficient when it comes to power requirements. This comes at a trade off in regards to speed. When Apple went Intel they had at least equivalent processors, and Rosetta often was quite a bit of a dog.

Running an x86 emulator on ARM doesn't sound like a very good idea at all. Binaries made for very fast processors running emulated on a slow processor would be a bad user experience, and there's quite a lot of evidence that in the mobile space the average person values user experience over everything else.

Uhm, because it's a different CPU instruction set?

Is there some joke I'm missing here?

That's a very narrow definition of denial of service attacks, and not usually used in security circles. The class of denials of service attacks is usually assumed to include every attack that, well, denies you the opportunity to use a service. That would include blowing up a transformer that is instrumental to providing power to the service that you're trying to consume, or setting the server room on fire and burning down the servers, which may well contain the only copy of the service they're hosting if the admins are particularly stupid.

Denial of service attacks don't necessarily temporarily deny access to the service, it can absolutely be permanent.

> The only thing I can think of is that the neighbor starts finding this suspicious stuff about them online. Calls the cops (or the cops call him) and then start pulling records off the wireless router.. Like you said the MAC address should be recorded. They may have been able to subpoena (or not, thanks patriot act) the local ISP's and start pulling mac addresses from the neighborhood.

That isn't how networks work.

MAC addresses are used on layer 2 broadcast domains. For an ISP to have seen the MAC address of his wireless card he would have to use that wireless card to directly connect to the ISP. That is fairly unlikely.

http://www.openwall.com/Owl/ARCHITECTURES.shtml
> Cross-builds are not supported: it is not possible to build packages for an architecture different than that of the build host, nor for a flavor of the architecture newer than that implemented in the build host's CPU.

No, it can't do cross-compiling. And ARM is not supported.