OK, but is it possible to corrupt the side-channel message by changing a few bits that are normally not used?

Hmm, ok, now it makes sense. But wouold it be possible to corrupt the message in the side-channel without invalidating the ssl-connection? That would mean there is a way to block the transfer after all...

OK, this finally makes sense. So it is steganography as well as encryption. Now I get it! :-)

And there is no way to corrupt the side-channel-information?

This would imply that there is a secret shared between a "good" telex router and the client, but not the regime. How would one organize the distribution of such secrets to the clients without the regime being able to either block the distribution or sniff out the secrets?

This is just shifting the problem from the communication link level to the secret distribution level...

Exactly my point. Without a secret that is known only to the client and the "good" router but not the regime the whole scheme falls apart...

What is hindering the oppressive regime to install its own telex-routers at the boundaries and filter out all telex-requests? Or, to use the analogy: why shouldn't the regime just block all coloured envelopes?

When I read "How To Ruin Your PC's Game Port", I thought "Easy! Just apply an overvoltage!" and immediately thought about all the wonderful hacks that we did, driving stepper motors via the parallel port and reading ultrasound proximity sensors via the game port...

*sigh*

Those were the days...

The initial reason why Mr. Alm started the whole thing was a brochure issued by the Austrian DMV that stated that headgear on the photo was only allowed for religious reasons. Now would you doubt the legality of an oficially-issued prochure?

Yes, it only took about one year due to the DMV requesting the mental examination. Yes, Mr. Alm did not pick up the driving license, but the DMV did not send him notification that he may pick up his drivers license as they usually do when a driving license isn't picked up.

Right, on his website Mr. Alm says that he is prepared to get the full treatment by officers whenever he is pulled over:

"Show me your spare tire, your Warndreieck and your first-aid-kit, now blow into the breathalyzer..."

Why should a judge be confronted with that? It was only the clerks at the DVM that had to do with this...

He didn't waste 3 years. He invested nearly nothing that would exceed the costs of a "normal" driving license, he even only borrowed the colander. And it cost him lets say one hour or two extra due to the medical examination and the paperwork.

And he did not waste tax-payers money, the DMV did it by not recognizing his religious rights in the first place...

There was a brochure issued by the DMV that said that you only may wear headgear for religious reasons on the photo. That was the initial trigger why @NikoAlm started the whole thing. The law regarding driving licenses says nothing about religion, only that the head must be "fully visible", but that came up only recently.

The clerk at the DMV initially refused to issue the driving license, asking for a photo without headgear. When Mr. Alm asked to get that in writing, the DMV issued a (kind of) subpoena instead and had Mr. Alm examined by a medical officer regarding his mental health. Luckily the examination only took 5 minutes and Mr. Alm now has it in writing that he is mentally sane and fit to drive a vehicle.

The DMV then issued the driving license after about a year but did not contact Mr. Alm so that he could pick it up, that's where the long delay came from.

That's the whole story as told at http://blog.alm.at/2011/07/12/hl-fuhrerschein-episode-6-das-finale/ (translation: http://goo.gl/MOsG1)

Yes, it is only a moral victory. For a real victory, somebody would have to do that with a passport photo where headgear really is only allowed for religious reasons. But hey, given the even international publicity, somebody might... :-)

I didn't give them permission. Unless they moved the important, but unusual parts of the EULA upfront and showed them in bold, they don't become part of the contract. Monitoring every step is unusual enough that one doesn't think it's a normal part of any EULA, so they need to point it out explicitely. Well, that is the law at least in my juristdiction... :-)

Greenpeace estimates that the Chernobyl death toll throughout the past 25 years sums up to 300.000 casualties. During the last 25 years there were about 300.000 victims of traffic accidents in Belarus and Ukraine.

A breached hydo power dam in China caused 30.000 immediate deaths and 120.000 deaths through plagues and famine.

The highest estimate given in a study of total Chernobyl victims is 900.000 worldwide. There are 1.2 million deaths due to traffic accidents worldwide each year.

Ash from coal plants is investigated as a source for uranium, as the concentration of uranium in the coal ash is higher than in several uranium ore deposits.

The background radiation in the town of Chernobyl is now twice as high as the background radiation in Kiev.

The Chernobyl exclusion zone has become a wildlife reservate for wolfes, which were nearly extinct before the desaster.

Damage to the Ukrainian economy due to Chernobyl is estimated at 6% of its BIP. A new sarcophagus will cost more than 500 M€.

Risk coverage in Germany and Switzerland for nuclear accidents: 1%.

Only the whole truth can make you free...

Let's hope the robot is hardened against ionizing radiation. Otherwise instead of "Hasta la vista, baby" it's more like "Dave, my mind is going..."