Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×
Slashback

Slashback: Justice, Delving, Printing, Noir 86

Updates on Tom's detective work, Kevin's touchy look-but-don't touch semi-citizen status, and last but not least a word from the elusive printman, here folded, spindled and mutilated for your edification.

Danke sehr, Herr Doktor Pabst! The sighs -- nay, screams! -- of disappointment rose like the wail of a cat in heat following the announcement that AMD's new chips would be clock-locked, nullifying the advantages of Abit's ultra-overclockable motherboard. Jonathan Dabian writes: "This is probably a little late for me to get the name postage on the front page, but Tom's Hardware posted a new story that is an update to the Monday Blurb where they revealed that the new AMD processors would be multiplier locked. In this new story, Tom Pabst reveals the information he has since pieced together about the connections on the top of the processor, and ideas on how to alter those laser etched connections. Overclocking on the Duron and Thunderbird isn't dead. All that's needed is an easy way to alter those connections."

How do you like your quasi-futuristic clothing, Mr. Mitnick? One of the many following the bizarre turns of the Kevin Mitnick saga, RadarRider writes: "According to the following article on MSNBC:' Reversing a previous decision, Kevin Mitnick?s probation officer has given the notorious computer intruder permission to lecture on hacking and cracking, work as a security consultant and write a column for a soon-to-be-launched e-commerce site.'"

Disallowing use of computers unless specially granted seems a fairly over-the-top punishment -- everything has embedded processors. I wonder if Kevin has to ask permission to use an infrared-type automatic toilet, or a programmable thermostat. Where's King Solomon when you need him?

Unca Steve, Unca Steve! Tell us a bedtime story, OK? Speaking of *ashback, gwernol writes: "There's a fascinating letter from Woz - one of the co-founders of Apple on his web page at woz.org. Its a candid glimpse into the early days of the computer world, including tales of hacking the world's first video games -Pong and Breakout - at Atari. See inside the mind of one of the truly great ones. Some interesting perspective on Steve Jobs, too."

(Hint: some of the same words you can't say on television are off-limits to mass-market video games, too!)

Now I can print up dozens of tasty eclaires under Linux! If you followed the recent story about modernizing UNIX printing standards, you may have caught the news that CUPS 1.1 has been released. Here's some more information from the horse's mouth. printman writes: "Nine months after the CUPS 1.0 release, we are proud the announce the birth of CUPS 1.1, with documentation nearly 500 pages long and distributions weighing in at around 4MB.

"What is CUPS", you ask? The Common UNIX Printing System ("CUPS") is an IPP-based printing system developed by Easy Software Products as a replacement for the aging and clunky Berkeley (LPD) and System V printing systems. CUPS provides all of the modern printing ammenities, including support for user-defined printers and options, non-PostScript printers, color management, and page accounting.

CUPS 1.1 continues our commitment to an open-sourced, IPP-based printing system for all UNIX's. The new release contains many of the functional enhancements that have been requested by our users, including:

  1. New USB backend and backend device discovery.
  2. Banner page support
  3. Digest authentication
  4. Directory service enhancements, including polling, relaying, and access control
  5. Directory structure changes to conform to the FHS 2.0 standard used by most Linux distributions.
  6. Documentation improvements and additions
  7. Drivers for EPSON printers
  8. Filters - new PostScript RIP based on GNU Ghostscript 5.50 core, new PDF filter based on Xpdf, new text filter supporting Unicode and bidirectional text
  9. IPP/1.1 support
  10. Job persistence & history
  11. Licensing change - the CUPS API is now provided under the GNU LGPL
  12. LPD client support
  13. User-defined printers and options
  14. Web administration interface

In addition we have contributed more new code to the SAMBA team to support CUPS printing "natively" via IPP, providing a faster, more reliable Windows printing experience.

Others have also been busy at work adding to CUPS. Besides our ESP Print Pro software, two new graphical interfaces have appeared for CUPS - KUPS is a KDE-based interface for CUPS, and XPP is a FLTK-based interface for CUPS.

On the driver front, Grant Taylor has come up with CUPS-o-matic, a PPD file generator and filter script for existing Ghostscript printer drivers, and the GIMP print plug-in developers are working towards "universal" drivers for GIMP, Ghostscript, and CUPS.

Finally, many Linux distributions are including (or planning to include) CUPS or ESP Print Pro. This should provide the final push to get printer manufacturers to support their printers under Linux and *BSD.

For more information on CUPS, go to: www.cups.org

And for bonus points ... Katsu Jin Ken writes: "Indrema has posted a new picture of their upcoming console on their front page." It's looking a lot svelter and sleeker than the old look, and like the finest computers everywhere, features a blue LED. (On the other hand, beware the rude no-exit site design.) Please, Indrema, make it so!

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Slashback: Justice, Delving,

Comments Filter:

  • I think it's good that Mitnick has been allowed to speak and such. So long as his engagements do not violate his probation, he should be able to do what he pleases. Lectures and public appearances seem relatively simple. So he has to stay away from anything communications related... big deal. I'm sure he's still allowed the privilege of overhead projectors and maybe even *gasp* a slideshow! Or can he use these as evil weapons to over throw the world again?

  • Kevin is NOT on parole,
    and he is NOT on probabation..

    He's on what's called supervised release...
    Right now, he's supposed to be a free man.
    This is not supposed to be a punitive condition.

    These restrictions are placed on him under
    a rule that allows for occupational restrictions
    on felons when necessary to protect the public.

    Parole is when you haven't done all of your
    time in the joint, and they let you out early.

    Probation is a sentence in itself. He was
    sentenced to time served and 6 months or so...
    He did every day of his sentence in jail.

    Let's talk about Inalienable rights for a minute:
    The right to a speedy trial:
    how about 4 years without a trial...
    The right to review the evidence against you:
    denied...
    Cruel and Unusual punishment:
    1 year of solitary confinement is torture
    and a human rights violation...

    This nonviolent and reformed man was placed in
    solitary confinement for a straight year, and
    treated like the most violent criminals are.
    He was forced to plead guilty when it became
    clear that the government was going to great lengths to conspire to deny him a fair trial.

    You don't put "Rights" in quotes. That's what
    they are... "Rights".. When you say inalienable,
    that means that they cannot be separated from you.

    You obviously have no idea about this case
    or about law, so I guess the moderators
    were on crack when they kicked this up to a 4.
  • The limitations are against any Programmable electronic device, and even then, it's up to the probation officer about what is or is not allowable. Kevin can use an HP calculator, a microwave, an even (i'm pretty sure) an ATM machine.

    If he was a real hacker, he would have no problem getting some HP graphing-calculator link-cable telnet going :]

    It is obligatory to say that this, like everything else, works better from a TI calc.

  • oh man, I said almost the exact same thing in my reply, except you said it first :]

    I thought "there is one reply to this post what is the chance he thought of this also"

  • Hnnn. Let's just use the english. Or better yet, just go with DWAF... Maybe DFAW (fire and water sounds better than water and fire, I think its a syllable count thing). Acronyms and english I can remember, latin... not so much.
  • Right.

    First things first: K. Mitnick did not kill anybody ... nor did he cause physical injury. So speculations about "drunk drivers plowing into crowds"(of nuns?) or "serial murders with cars" and whatnot is wildly off. Kevin stole. The analogy is more like someone who uses a car to rip off a million dollars. Actually, given the nature of the actual crimes, it's like "using a car to disrupt a system worth millions of dollars". You know how you "disrupt a system worth millions of dollars" with your car? You park it in the middle of the Holland Tunnel at rush hour, throw the keys down a grate and walk away. And you know what your punishment for that act will be?

    A fucking traffic ticket.

  • I suppose I'll add to those assumptions:

    (1) If they're really using X, all the decrypted video must go through the X server (or some shared memory it has access to) to reach the screen
    (2) This content could be captured with a hacked X server

    So, if there really is to be no programmatic access to the decrypted data, the DVD must go directly to the video card, bypassing X.
    I'd love DVD under linux / XFree86, even if it has to be binary only. But linux is too powerful and modular to please the lawyers.

  • Sure, but what's he going to hook it into?
  • They list all the specs (CPU, RAM, Video, etc.) but don't mention what that drive on the front will read. Is it a DVD drive? Just a CD-ROM drive? Will the thing play DVDs? I didn't bother reading more than the front page and the page with specs, but these things should be on the specs page.
  • Were would he get a modem? He's prohibited from having one. And if he did get one, and his parole officer found out, what happens to his calculator?

    Trying to sneak around the restricitions placed on him would just get more of them placed on him, or get him sent back to jail.
  • ...has tried that and it did not work.

    He's getting a few retail processors and is going to try it again, but apparently changing the contacts did absolutely nothing to the prerelease processors. Go fig.
  • I can see it now. Geek mating rituals:

    Hey baby, want to see the etchings on my overclocked Athlon?
  • How about not channeling it anywhere? how about growing up?

    I'm fine with overclocking. What makes you think only black hats do it?

  • The answer is 'maybe'...probably depending on which version of the device you choose to buy. It looks like they licensed the DVD code, and as part of their agreement they locked it away inside the box and limited the API. It's not completely free, but it will probably be free enough for me. I know I'd spend a decent amount of money for commercial Linux software to view DVDs. If the Powers That Be really had a good grasp of business and marketing, they would release several (free, at least in the no-charge sense) platform-dependant versions of the CSS libraries with a common API. They end up with just as much copy protection as they had before, and their primary product (the DVDs themselves) enjoy a wider audience. DVD information from the Indrema FAQ: Q: Will IES support DVD? A: Yes, the IES platform will support DVD playback in some models. The details of DVD support in the L600 will be announced later. Q: How will CSS, SDMI and other copy protection systems work with Open Source? A: The OpenStream architecture will allow for hooks into the API for driver level abstraction of commands. That will allow an OpenStream command to pass through to the CSS, SDMI or other handler, which will not be Open Source. This system ensures that no programmatic access to decrypted content will be possible in the IES.
  • Heh. I hope you (and everybody else) realise that the blue LED is probably there just because the PlayStation 2 happens so have one. ObAnecdote: I had the pleasure of listening in to Phil Harrison's (VP of SCEA) key note at the GDC in March, and he made a point of the fact that the blue LED on the machine seems to be the most successful part of its design. ;^) Apparantly, people couldn't care less for Emotion Engines, Graphics Synthesizers, and analog controller buttons -- just give them a nice blue LED to look at and they're happy! ;^)
  • I don't think its a complete 180, exactly. The initial ruling was a blanket restriction. Mitnick's lawyers didn't get them to make a blanket reversal of their ruling, saying "he can work at whatever he wants to," (they've tried and failed,) but they did find that presenting his options one at a time had an effect. Basically they've gone the route of letting the court decide whether each individual case is safe. If the court doesn't think he's a threat in a particular job, they'll let him have it.

    The courts set the precedent for this by allowing him to speak before Congress a few months ago. Having done that, I'm sure it was harder to say "no" to the next specific request. He still can't access computers, even for his online column - someone else will have to enter and upload it for him.

    I'm speculating here, but I think that what the courts wanted was for him to a) stay away from any device that he could conceivably commit intrustion with, and b) not be allowed to make obscene amounts of money off of his celebrity status, since he obtained it by being put in jail for four years without trial. Perhaps these specific allowances don't violate either of those ideas, (I have no idea what he's being paid for his speaking engagements.)
  • Actually they'd probably tow your car.
  • Those are the two options, don't talk about his rights...... He voluntarily signed those away, by choosing not to follow society's rules.

    Reminds me of a shrinkwrap license. Your being born implies consent, etc.

    Hamish

  • So is the idea that children grow up and when they hit the age of majority, be in 18 or 21, THEY decide at that point if they wish to follow the laws and rules of society or not?

    What if they choose not to follow those rules? What is I decide that society's rues regarding murder, theft, or anything else just should not apply to me because I don't agree with them? What happens to this person? We don't prosecute them right? Sounds all well and good.

    I choose not to follow society's rules. They do not apply to me. I have decided that killing someone close to you is something I want to do. What do you have to say about it? Isn't it my "right" to choose not to follow those rules by your own logic?

    Think these things through. If adherence to the laws and rules of a society in general is somthing that is purely personal, what happens to mankind in general?

    If you want to think of it this way, feel free......no, you do not have to follow those rules, you can decide that you wish to live outside of them....Realize, however, that those rules are usually put in place either by the majority directly or by proxy (representative government, which, if we really don't agree, can be changed). You don't have to live by the rules that the society has put in place, but realize that if you wish to remove yourself from socity, you will be removed from society and put someplace else.....we call it prison

  • t makes you think only black hats do it?
    The post I am replying to states: This vigilante sort of attitude you give real hackers a bad name.
    I am simply saying that does with these vigilante attitudes are being less harmful by overclocking than lets say DDoSing microsoft.com. Well Auctually the benifits to society caused by deoing harm to Microsoft is a whole other topic entirely.
  • Randolph said the probation office specifically approved four gigs for the 36-year-old Mitnick.

    So I said, they wont let him have a computer, but they'll let him have a hard disk? Sheesh!

    Followed by the thought "And 4 gigs isn't that much nowadays... he must be disappointed."

    Keith "1.21 Gigabytes!" Tyler
    --
  • Yeah, he's on probation which means restricted freedom, but they cannot deny him his basic rights.


    Sure they can... people on probation can't buy guns, and no one seems to have a problem with that.

    I'd tell Kevin if he has such a problem with the terms of his probation, he's more than free to serve out the rest of his sentence in jail... going out on probation is a privledge, not a right.
  • Heh, I agree that TI's are better :)
    I have an HW1 89, and just love it. I even managed to put in a jack/diode for an external power supply. (I hate changing batteries!)

    --
  • by (deleted - SCI) ( 207889 ) on Wednesday July 12, 2000 @04:47PM (#938726)
    I don't justify what Mitnick did, but when I hear about this case, I am reminded of the ancient Roman punishment "aqua et igni interdictus" ("to be denied water and fire", a form of ostracism that was more common in Greece, but I'll be damned if I can remember the Greek name for it)

    In under six months, we'll be in the 21st century (no flames, we're all sick of that debate, and either way you look at it, the statement is true) and Mitnick's parole conditions will pass into history as a testament to our irrationality.

    If a mechanic with several DUIs plows into a crowd and kills several people, we may take away his license (to prevent further deaths) and sentence him to prison (for his reckless disregard, etc.), but we don't prevent him from ever working on cars, buying or selling cars, being a paid anti- drunk driving activist, or examining the car being used as evidence [kevinmitnick.com] against him during his trial. [the link above includes many articles about the unusual handling of his case]

    We wouldn't do such things even if he was a vehicular serial killer. I think using a car or computer are roughly comparable in the coming decades. many might argue that the computer would be even more omnipresent and valuable.

    Are we so messed up that the courts are actually willing to openly state that corporate damages and evading the police are worse crimes than sniffing out than several human lives?
  • The best part of McIntosh amps are their displays. Analogue all the way. The way sound should display (it is a wave by the way :) .. If only some other companies would realise sometimes a meter is better than a lcd readout.
  • Um. he's a criminal. he has no rights.
  • Rombuu wrote: "Sure they can [deny Kevin Mitnick the right to computers] ... people on probation can't buy guns, and no one seems to have a problem with that."

    Actually, I do have a problem with a (non-violent) probationer being unable to buy a gun.

    I worry about a multi-tiered society where what should be rights are instead viewed as priveleges, and on a sliding scale ... [instead of slashdot pure, it could be "citizen ranking"]

    I guess I prefer either concrete material damages assessed (for non violent crimes) or time served (for violent crimes) and after that, no lingering aftertaste imposing petty tyrannies of the sort mitnick has to. He (nearly) might as well be in jail.

    What if a great musician picked people's pockets to the tune of millions of dollars while they were distracted by the sound of his (for instance) spellbindingly good kazoo playing. Would it be right to deny him the use of a kazoo once he's out of prison? A harmonica? Anything that makes notes?

    timothy

  • Jakob Nielsen [useit.com] would disagree with you. Most articles are too long for the attention span of the reader. I think tom should try instead to have a print only version, but in the "tom's blurb" section you have a few multi-page topics (clocking athies) and some other topics (rdram etc).. In this case it should be ok to put these on separate pages.

    However, The site itself has a very cluttered, ad buggered appearance. Perhaps he can find better methods of making revenue. Perhaps he can do what many site designers are doing, and do it as a labour of love (gasp!) without ads. I could care less if I get ad hits on lowmagnet.org [lowmagnet.org] because I'm not about to make 1/10th of the money I shelled out to get the site up and running.

  • What if a great musician picked people's pockets to the tune of millions of dollars while they were distracted by the sound of his (for instance) spellbindingly good kazoo playing. Would it be right to deny him the use of a kazoo once he's out of prison? A harmonica? Anything that makes notes?

    What if a doctor raped patients when they were under anesthetic? Would it be right to deny him his medical practice when he got out of jail? well, yes. I don't really find the restriction that bizzare.

    -Kahuna Burger

  • Wow, man, I like it! Hey everyone, new Jargon proposed here:

    Aqua et igni indterdictus adj. [Latin, "to be denied water and fire"] Barred or otherwise prevented from connecting to the Internet, or (worse) using a computer at all, esp. as a result of legal action.

    -JD
  • There are two cases to analyze: Hobbyist overclocking is, or is not widespread. I don't think it is widespread, but in both cases AMD has good reason to attempt to limit overclockability.

    Let's say that overclocking is widespread. Then AMD is losing significant income because of it. People are getting essentially better pieces than they payed for, basically ripping AMD off, not good for them.

    However, if overclocking is not widespread, then arguments such as the economic gain from the 440BX fall to pieces, and really, the company, here AMD, has no reason to allow overclocking - apart, perhaps, from the vocal "special interest" group, i.e. overclockers, giving them bad press.

    However, I don't think this small group really factors into their decision process, because it isn't those lone hobbyists that they are so afraid of, but systematic overclocking. AMD has had problems in Australia and elsewhere in the region where overclocked CPU's were sold remarked as if they were intended for the higher price. The unknowing customer gets a worse piece, and blames AMD for it, not something they want. In addition, AMD loses revenue, because all those people buying illegally remarked CPU's would have bought legal parts as well. It is this form of systematic overclocking that AMD really wants to prevent, and alas, but thay really can't make that a priority, this means no fun for us (unless your really crazy about scratching around on your CPU) :-(.

    --EMN
  • They should have come out and said ...

  • "crime against a business" is not a crime against people? Every *dime* worth of bubble gum that gets shop-lifted out of your local 7-11 must be paid either by the owner of the establishment (and thus his wife and 3 kids) or by the consumer in the form of higher prices. Sometimes, I think this whole "us vs them" attitude towards businesses is really getting rediculous. A business is simply a legally structured organization of *people*, who get paid based on the profits of the group at large. A company does bad, gets robbed, etc, and GOOD PEOPLE LOSE JOBS. -Ben
  • OK....I know I'm going to get flamed for this, but please, read, stop and think before doing so.

    All societies work because the members of the society agree, either explicitly or implicitly to follow the rules of that society. A person's "rights" are often compromised to achieve this goal. There must be compromise for the civility of the society in general. This is not a bad thing folks. It is what stops society from being survival of the fittest. American society is far from perfect, but it does a fairly decent job at it, at least better than a lot of them out there.

    This being said, realize that when a member of society chooses not to abide by the rules of that society, that society needs to censure them. They are criminals, and loose many of what we consider to be "rights" They have chosen to live outside of the society and their wish to be outside comes true, they are stripped of some of the rights and privileges that the greater society allows its members. This is not a bad thing either folks. Its part of the deterrent factor. It might not work in all cases, hell it might not work in the majority of cases, but it does work in some.

    Ragardless of what you personally think of Mitnik, realize this, he was a criminal. He violated the rules of society. He choose to live outside the rules and believed that his "rights" superceeded yours and mine and those of the rest of society. For this he NEEDS and DESERVES to be punished.

    The purpose of punishment folks is to hurt the person who offended. This is/was the meaning of the penal system, the PENALIZE those who break the rules of society, and just like when you were a child, and your parents grounded you, something important must be taken away to accomploish this goal. In the case of Mitnik, its access to computers and electronic devices.

    The fact that he is out of probation at all is not his right, it is a provilege that comes with a condition, the condition that he follow society's rules (the terms imposed by his probation) Look at this as a way for him to attempt to show that he can.) If he can not follow the rules imposed by society (or by the courts in proxy for society) then he should be back in prison. He has already been afforded more than his rights demand. If he or anyone else wants to claim that his rights have been violated, then send him back to prison, where he no longer gets the opportunity to proove that he can live within society's guidelines.

    Those are the two options, don't talk about his rights...... He voluntarily signed those away, by choosing not to follow society's rules. It was a gamble and he lost. Now its time to pay the debt. Considering all things, he is being given the opportunity to pay part of that debt in a much more relaxed way than it could have been. He should be thankful for the opportunity, and those who support him should be glad he was given the opportunity to proove he can once again exist within society and follow its rules rather than serving more prison time. Not griping about it.

  • That is a great point. I'd mod you up, but I notice that you're at 5 already, and I don;t have any mod points anyway. But here you go, you receive the smart post of the day award. Wear it with pride.
  • If only they'd uee *more than one* blue LED.

    timothy
  • The best part of the apple disk was the dancing guy. By Bishop, IIRC.

    It played some little ditty (I belive it is the "turkey jig" or some silly name) and had some guy dancing on the screen (simple page flipping, no doubt) in tune to the music, but it was molto impressive at the time.

  • This is fraud in what way? When I buy something, do I not have the right to jump up and down on it, spit on it, throw it against a wall, burn it or anything else. Why should it be fraud for me to open it up and alter it? I'm allowed to buy a car and put different parts in it or change stuff that is in there. What is so different about a CPU? If someone wants to get the most power they can from a product that they bought, more power to them. In this case, literally.
    Molog

    So Linus, what are we doing tonight?

  • Anyone else betting that Kevin Mitnick, seeing as how he's permitted to lecture on hacking/cracking is going to be a "surprise" guest at Hope2k, the 2600-sponsored "hacker" convention this weekend in New York?

    I know I'll be expecting to see him there...

    --Cycon

  • Oh sorry. Didn't know you were a liberal.
  • Um. he's a criminal. he has no rights.

    That's a ridiculous statement.
  • g-CUPS?

    It boggles the mind, don't it boys!

    --
  • That Idrema [indrema.com] box looks like so many other psuedo-futuristic modern gadget designs, like some sleek underwater device, or a handy tray to keep your marble collection in.. What I want to see is some good-old-fashioned future noir design in some settop boxes.. Something more sid mead/bladerunnerish. Something that looks a little more dangerous.

    Uh, yeah, but I'd take one in a pinch..
  • From what i understand, a Laser etched chip would be way to small for a home user to modify. but, what about those in university labs or other semi-commonly accessable Equipment.
  • Well, which company paid off the probation office?

    I know that alot of people here are going to put me on the sh*t list, but he was convicted and serving a sentence. Why whould there be a 180-degree reversal. Something just sounds fishy.

    still, it is good to see some justice from absurd rulings.

    geek = chic, but does CAD = geek [cadfu.com]
  • Did AMD engineers really think this would stop fraud? This looks simpler than SMP with celerons. It's almost like the engineers are secretly catering to the hackers with all these "riddles" and backdoors to solve. kewl!
  • ... bottom of the page [indrema.com]
    Q: Exactly what parts of IES are Open Source?
    A: Much of the driver level code, API implementations and all kernel code is Open Source. The only exceptions are components of drivers, which must be preserved in a binary library file for security or copy protection integrity and the Xtrema API implementation. Some application components such as the Gecko HTML rendering engine and Necko transport engine are also Open Source. Many application components of the IES, such as the personal video system, will not be Open Source
  • by Anonymous Coward
    If Solomon was alive today, he would propose the child be cut in two, the child would be cut in two, then the lawyars would come in and sue Solomon. Solomon was supposed to be wise, so I doubt he would be caught anywhere near a courtroom these days.
  • by j-pimp ( 177072 ) <zippy1981@@@gmail...com> on Wednesday July 12, 2000 @03:24PM (#938751) Homepage Journal
    In addition we have contributed more new code to the SAMBA team to support CUPS printing "natively" via IPP, providing a faster, more reliable Windows printing experience.
    Its good to see one OSS project helping another one with slightly different goals. Hopefully other projects will take after their example.
  • The copyright office has posted [loc.gov] the post-reply hearings regarding the DMCA circumvention rulemaking. Have you hugged your Librarian of Congress recently? I hope so, because his office is going to decide the fate of publication and fair use as we know it... Unless Orrin Hatch gets entirely fed up with the RIAA and fixes the DMCA singlehandedly.

    Also, 2600 [2600.com], the EFF [eff.org], the MPAA, and the Harvard Open Law [harvard.edu] discussion list prepare for the trial over the publication of DeCSS, in which a preliminary injunction that constitutes a prior restraint on the defendant's speech will be decided simultaneously with the merits of the trial on July 17th.
  • It's not that hard, you can break the connection in a number of ways, the key is to not break your CPU at the same time :-)
    --------
  • by Alakaboo ( 171129 ) on Wednesday July 12, 2000 @03:36PM (#938754) Homepage
    With the `low, low prices' (yes, K-Mart reference intended) of AMD's new processor, the Thunderbird, do we really *need* to overclock these babies? According to JC (http://www.jc-news.com/pc) and The Register, the price of the 1GHz Athlon will be dropping to $500 in September (it will be the Thunderbird core by then), with the 800MHz Athlon dropping to less than $200.

    ::Point::

    At 4MHz/dollar on such a nice, well-designed part, why bother? For reference, my Celeron-II 566 @ 850MHz gave me 7MHz/dollar when I bought it, and that's a 150% overclock, but it's a piece of junk with no SMP and 4-way set-associative cache (opposed to Thunderbird's 16-way). I've always "rationalized" (why is it that [geeks] feel they can rationalize [overclocking]?) my overclocking madness by saying that I "have a lot to get Intel back for," the 8088, the 486SX, the Pentium MMX, etc. But at this point in the game, AMD isn't trying to saturate the market, or confuse us, or bleed us for every cent we're worth [like Intel]. Let's buy their silicon and run with it.

    ::Counter-Point::

    On the other hand, only a select few people overclock their computers. I would say less than 1% of all the people who purchase new computers yearly and that's probably generous. Was it really worth the time and effort of AMD, Tom Pabst, et cetera to stop 10,000 or so people from getting an extra 100 or 150MHz out of their shiny new AMD CPU?

    ::Inference::

    If anything, overclocking HELPS the market. Look at how many mainboards Abit and Soyo have sold over the last three years because of the incredible overclocking goodness of the i440BX chipset. People with a Pentium II 300 decided to go ahead and make that upgrade to 600MHz because they could do it for $200 or $300 instead of $500 like it would to buy all `kosher' parts. Otherwise they may have waited another year. Cheaper prices, more CPU purchases, more mainboards, more fans, more slotkets, etc. Basic economics, right?

    ::Hypothesis::

    Would AMD have ever made it this far had their loyalists not bought the AMD 586 to overclock it, the K6-2 to overclock it, and the Athlon Classic to overclock it for less than it would cost to buy an Intel part?

    Humm, humm. :) Food for thought.

    Alakaboo

  • by sethgecko ( 167305 ) on Wednesday July 12, 2000 @03:39PM (#938755) Homepage
    Tom's hardware has the scoop here [tomshardware.com] on overclocking the socketed processors.. Apparently they are easily overclockable, and no extra devices are needed to overclock--just an engineer's conductive silver pen. Only problem is getting ahold of one, apparently.

  • However, the comment about not allowing Kevin to use any computers is grossly misleading. The limitations are against any Programmable electronic device, and even then, it's up to the probation officer about what is or is not allowable.

    Thank you. I was getting pretty sick of all this over the top "so he can't were a wristwatch" silliness. You can claim that there's a slippery slope to what he can and can't do, but its really not that hard - You could take 10 people and give them a list of things to decide if they did or didn't fit the probation and as long as none of them were being deliberately dense, you'd get at least 8 or 9 agreements on every item. 10 for 10 on most.

    Don't make things harder than they. It just makes you look silly.

    -Kahuna Burger

  • by Anonymous Coward
    Ok, and this is off topic (so moderate away), but think carefully about this -- you lose most of your rights as an American simply by being a convicted felon. At first scratch, it sounds find and reasonable. Of course, the US has a higher percentage of its population in jail than any other country, and we have fully 1/4th of the world's prisoners right here. Somewhere between one and two percent of the U.S. population is in jail, so that's a sizeable percentage of the population to not have "full citizenship", so to speak. And of course I don't need to point out to any American that by far more minorities are in jail, even on a crime-per-crime method of accounting for it. I'm no apologist for Mr. Mitnick, but I'm no apologist for the U.S. criminal system either. Simply being a "felon" in the U.S. is no guarentee that you deserve the title, that you in fact did anything wrong (wrong as in immoral), or anything of the sort. Voting alone becomes interesting. If 1-2% of the U.S. can't vote, that's enough to throw an election one way or another. And if there's a strong tendency to insure that only minorities are made into convicted felons, that changes the political landscape drastically. And if 1-2% (or more) of the US feels that the US justice system is unfair, or heavy-handed, then the elimination of voting rights from current felons guarentees that their voice doesn't count, that only those who disagree with the current system (but carefully abide by it's rules despite this) will have any power to change it. In other words, the system is, what's the word... rigged. The rate of the growth of the prison population is scary in this country. Since the percentage of the US that's in jail has gone up fourfold in the last 20 years, this means that by 2075, the entire US will be in jail (yes, I'm kidding -- sort-of). The key is laws that "tend to make criminals out of us all" (if someone remembers who said that, pipe in please). If 37% of the US smokes pot, at least occasionally, and that's a jailable offence (it is in most states), then potentially, the US can (attempt) to throw 37% of it's population in jail. Ridiculous, I know. So how is it decided who goes to jail and who doesn't? Clearly not every pot smoker can go to jail. So, they attack the minorities, or those who make no attempt to hide it. Now let's look at this in terms of MP3's. How long before downloading an MP3 is a jailable offense (in the US)? The US solution to any "problem" is to make laws, and to any lawbreaker is to jail them. This just can't work.
  • Now that I got that addlepated post on the screen, I can take a little time and bring some details.

    -I meant to say "post-hearing replies"

    -Take a close look at the comments submitted. I encourage everyone to even just skim them, if they have the time. There were a total of 28.

    -9 were clearly against any exemptions to the anti-circumvention provision, all submitted by big media (one co-signed by ASCAP, Association of American University Presses [ironically in direct opposition with the comments of the Association of American Universities, The American Council on Education, and the National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges], the BSA, The McGraw-Hill Companies, the MPAA, and the RIAA.

    -One has an informative illustration of the flawed nature of CSS and how it inhibits non-infringing use of copyrighted materials.

    -Most of the arguments against exemption lean on the fact that nobody "adequately" testified to current hinderance of fair use... totally ignoring the arguments of CSS and misdirecting the purpose of the rulemaking (to prevent hinderance).

    -I didn't notice a single comment by a self-proclaimed artist. You know, the people that copyright is supposed to protect? Sure, there were a few clearinghouses that represent the copyright interests of artists--but that's a bit disconnected from what the artist actually wants. After all, these clearinghouses have their own financial stake in the DMCA, separate from the interests of the artists they represent. Of course, let's not forget that we are all protected by copyright, self-proclaimed artist or not. Yet the overwhelming majority of us copyright holders are for exemptions to 1201(a)! Why is that?

    -On to the trial: The final depositions are wrapping up. The judge has consolidated [uscourts.gov] the motion to expand the preliminary injunction, as well as the motion to vacate the PI, with the trial itself. He moved the trial date up because of the first amendment implications of banning the distribution of DeCSS on a 1201(a) case, rather than on a pure copyright basis, among various other reasons.

    -The DVD-discuss list is preparing an amicus brief... hopefully it will address basic flaws in the MPAAs pursuit of the lawsuit over circumvention, my favorite being that circumvention does not exist under 1201 if the copyright owner's authorization scheme to access the material is not well defined. There are many more, so review the archive [harvard.edu], take note in particular of the proposed outlines for the brief, and see exactly why the MPAA will lose before it actually happens. The list is generally the best place to catch wind of current developments, as most filings and transcripts don't make it to wide distribution and those that do might just make it to 2600 and cryptome.

    -Don't forget to donate to the EFF (I haven't sent my check either, yet), because they're footing the bill for this.

  • Under the new (and I would say, more enlightened) interpretation of Kevin's parole, your analogy with the DUI person is excellent, though not in the manner you intended. Once convicted of a DUI, I lose the ability to operate the device that I abused. Oops. That sounds exactly like what Kevin's parole is: he can't use computers. The harsher restrictions regarding computers for Kevin reflects the reality that it's very hard to control someone once they have access to a computer. While the DUI person could reasonably be expected to abide by his parole and still work as a mechanic, is it really realistic to allow Kevin to work as a PC tech at CompUSA and not actually use a computer? He would easily be able to violate his parole, and it would be very difficult to detect that violation. Therefore, he is banned from being in situations that provide this temptation.

    Now, in both cases, after a period of time, the offender may be able to get back the privilege (and, yes, operating a computer is privilege - you can certainly survive without using a PC) that was lost.

    I don't consider his (new) parole conditions onerous, or outlandish, given the crime he was convicted of (pleading guilty is a conviction).

    As far as your last statement reguarding "white collar" crime vs. violent crime, I'm of the opinion we seriously underpunish white-collar crime. Look at it from a societal standpoint (which is what the punishment is supposed to take into account):

    A violent crime causes almost unlimited damage to a single (or at most, a tiny number) of individuals. The biggest damage to society is that it undermines the faith we have in your society to protect us from bodily harm.

    White-collar crime (extortion, embezzelment, fraud, cracking, et al.) tends to adversely affect a huge number of people. And while the individual impact might be less (though try to explain that to an 80-year-old grandma whose life savings were just fleeced), it does far, far, far greater societal harm. For white collar crime gnaws at the fundamental societal illusions that keep our country from reducing to total anarchy: you're screwing with the trust in the financial system, and in the trust of the consumer->producer relationship.

    Honestly, I have no problem with a cracker who steals 100,000 credit card numbers getting a harsher sentance than a DUI-induced involuntary vehicular homocide. Not that the DUI person should get off lightly, but I can't stomache the people who cry "But nobody got hurt!" at the white-collar criminal's trial. That's just bullshit.

    -Erik

  • ... made me think a bit. Good point.

    However, there could be much more rigidly defined things which Mitnick would be disallowed from doing which I would find reasonable. I don't know the exact terms of his parole, but not being able to use a computer for things like writing a column (like it or not, computer security is his area of expertise) or other innocuous things is like saying that the rapist doctor can't even enter a hospital to use the restroom.

    I'm not particularly defending K. Mitnick here, really, but again, I'm worried about an era of perpetual, incremental punishment. There's a danger to an environment of ubiquitous graduated punishment and tailored prohibionism. I wonder when his probation's up; will he one day be allowed to touch a keyboard again?

    ok,

    timothy

  • I've always "rationalized" (why is it that [geeks] feel they can rationalize [overclocking]?) my overclocking madness by saying that I "have a lot to get Intel back for," the 8088, the 486SX, the Pentium MMX, etc. But at this point in the game, AMD isn't trying to saturate the market, or confuse us, or bleed us for every cent we're worth [like Intel]. Let's buy their silicon and run with it.

    Oh man, are you ever missing the point to overclocking! It has never, ever, ever been about ripping a company off, ever. But what it has been is a penis contest, the same way in which tweaking your car out with overpowered crap in the 60s, 70s, and 80s was. It's all about power (arghh arghh arghhh (Tim Allen grunt)) and getting the most bang out of your buck.

    We all know that the chip manufacturers run pretty much all the chips off the same line, test a few from a batch at different clock speeds and whatever they get out of them is what they label them as. So if you know your 750 came off the same line as a 850, why not push it?

    Again, this isn't about ripping a company off. You bought the peice of hardware, you can do whatever you want with it, period, and just because you overclock doesn't mean you're ripping anyone off.

    -- iCEBaLM
  • Kevin wasn't even that much of a problem in the first place. He caused no damage, and didn't profit from anything that he found. He has been abused and had his rights stripped by a stupid justice system that locks people up for breaking into a computer system but will let violent criminals out in a few months. Kevin Mitnick is not a threat to society and those around him. Some of the people who are getting early parole all the time might not have the same thing said about them.
    Molog

    So Linus, what are we doing tonight?

  • .... as if I have to say it.

    (Would it be going to far to suggest an Enlightenment epplet interface? Yeah, I thought it might.)
  • "Fraud" meaning you buy a batch of 750 MHz chips, overclock them and sell them as 1GHz chips.
    --
  • What if a doctor raped patients when they were under anesthetic? Would it be right to deny him his medical practice when he got out of jail? well, yes. I don't really find the restriction that bizzare.

    Banning the use of a computer is a heck of a lot more restrictive than banning the use of anaesthetics. The hypothetical doctor (who has committed a far more serious offence) could still make a living (admittedly not in their chosen profession) once they got out of gaol, but it's getting to the point where you can't hold any job if you can't use a computer.

  • The fraud comes when some fly-by-night buys a bunch of mobo's over-clocks them, and sells them to unsuspecting non-geek people. They don't know there getting something that will burnout, lockup, or die.
    --
  • Please point me to the section in the Constitution or Bill of Rights where it says that I have the inalienable right to use a computer. Oops. You can't.

    The decleration of independence has that bit about "freedom to persue happyness" (which is not the same as a right to be happy, just the right to try). That is pretty broad. Let's see playing by the rules I'm not sure the constitution says anything, but the Bill of Rights says "Amendment IX The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

    In other words the framers of the bill of rights may have come 150 years too early to grant an explicit right to use a computer, but they still found a big middle finger to wave at your argument.

    Sure, computers make many jobs easier, but claiming that they are akin to some sort of "natural right" smacks of elitism.

    Why? It seems more like elitism to deny someone's right to do a thing. That is to say to restrict a thing to a privlaged class, an elite if you will.


    Of corse this is irrelivant to Mitnick's case. He is a convicted (by his own plea) felon. Convicted felons have restricted rights. For example the first amendment right "of the people peaceably to assemble" is not granted to a felon.

    I'm not sure if he is restored of those rights after his jail term would be up, or if it is totally up to the judge/probation officer.

    I would hope a continued show of "reform" would allow him his rights to be restored. (I quote reform since ou can't really show that you are no longer a nasty cracker if you can't use a computer -- much like one couldn't show themselves to no longer be drive faster then the speed limit until one is allowed to drive again!)

    I won't even comment on whether I think the punisment is too harsh or not. There are lots of harsh punishments doled out by our goverment. I would be foolish to single out this particular one to wine about.

  • It seems saying anything bad about St. Kevin around here is like saying anything against Sig11 or Linux, or saying anything good about MSFT.

    Would the owners of this site please update the moderation guidelines, giving the rest of us the list of sacred cows we must not criticize, and the other rules we must not break, to avoid a bitchslap?
    --

  • Keep things in perspective...

    Before the "big bust", Kevin had already been busted for for other cracks, and was already on probation.

    He violated that probation, and went on a year long cracking spree.

    The guy has addiction issues with the cracking... and enforced total abstinence is a reasonable requirement for probation . Remember, probation says "You should be in jail, but we will let you out early and give you some limited freedoms if you if you will agree to these particular terms".

    Speeding is recoginized as a minor infraction, but if I get caught speeding 200 times in a year, and skip out on every required court appearance, and ignore the fact that my license was suspended, then finally get nailed, you can bet I will be facing some serious jail time. Just for speeding? Sort of... but not really.

    You can argue with the sentance if you want, and that may or may not be reasonable... Mitnick was such a prolific cracker that he set himself up for some serious jail time... but arguing about the terms of probation is a little silly, Kevin is always free to return to jail if he finds that a better alternative...

    Bill
  • but it's getting to the point where you can't hold any job if you can't use a computer.

    'You want fries with that?'

    That's the life he deserves, when he chose to break laws in pursuit of his hobby. Probation IS a privelege, and the terms of probation can be as draconian as the judge sees fit. Mitnick can always appeal the terms, and if another judge agrees, he' is free and clear.
    --

  • Was that BASIC Breakout game that Woz describing called "Little Brick Out?"

    LBO was one of the nice little surprises on the Apple II system disk .. there was also the Animals game and the biorhythms chart. That Animals game was my first exposure to programming data files, and I remember doing an all-nighter when I was twelve, trying to make LBO usable with a joystick rather than a paddle.

    Ah, those were the days! Anyone remember any of the other goodies on the Apple II disk?

    zo.

  • a corporation wouldn't even concieve of slapping you with a lawsuit if you reverse engineered something, they would offer you a job
    . My low chip PONG caught the attention of key Atari people and they wanted to hire me.
    What a shinning example of how things used to be, when corporations weren't afraid of users understanding and configuring their technology, when pride and knowledge came before money and PR. I guess Atari's success (or lack there of) really goes to show how a real business model and a real quest for imagination does for you in today's tyrannical corporatalist economy. Those were the glory days, but if you squint hard enough you just might be able to see some of the future woz's today, in court. With corporations scaring them out of their imaginations and dreams.
  • Things like McIntosh componentry, and Wadia, some Arcam ... they look utterly, ruggedly functional ... like something out of a 50's space command center. Scientific, even.

    The best thing about the new indrema look (to me) is the blue LED. I don't really like the asymetrical, lozengy, "swallowed by a large slug" look of this. It's sleek, but as Charlie Brown once asked Lucy, "How can a jumprope be hi-fi?"

    timothy
  • by Anonymous Coward
    it's random junk generated by the script kiddie's friend, slashtroll [xoom.com].
  • Kevin Mitnick's probation personnel most likely didn't want to waste their budget defending themselves against a free-speech violation that was blatantly in conflict with the first amendment. Yeah, he's on probation which means restricted freedom, but they cannot deny him his basic rights.
  • Apparently they are easily overclockable, and no extra devices are needed to overclock--just an engineer's conductive silver pen.

    You don't just need the pen, you need some etching fluid, or some other way to remove the tracing between the contacts that AMD put there. As he said, some etching fluid and a needle might just be the way to go...

    -Nathan

  • The day they require you to earn a doctorate and get a license to be able to use a computer is the day your analogy is correct.

    The restriction is bizarre because using a computer is something akin to a "natural right" - and the kazoo analogy is thus closer to the mark.

    How to deal with someone like Mitnick? I don't know, but inventing weird kinds of punishment and violating the Bill of Rights several times along the way just doesn't seem like the way to do it.
  • by Outlyer ( 1767 ) on Wednesday July 12, 2000 @07:01PM (#938778) Homepage
    If you read through the FAQ, you'll notice that Indrema has an architecture for playing DVD's on their DV Linux. Now, using the following assumptions:
    (1) The encryption stuff is binary-only, and they have (what they claim) is a safe way to show the stream without 'progmatic' access to it.
    (2) Their box is x86, mine is x86
    (3) They also mention that it's fully based on X.
    (4) It's DVD Video on Linux (!)
    They could easily sell the DVD portion to desktop users as well. I understand that everyone is supposed to hate DVD's, but I love my movies, and I'd love to be able to run Linux on my notebook AND watch my DVDs.
    All politics and DeCSS stuff aside, this could be a Good Thing(tm).
  • Uhh, is it just me or is Kevin looking a lot older these days? Check out the article. It features a not so flattering picture of him....
  • I disagree...

    For one, isn't most white-collar crime against a company or business. How does that affect individual people?

    Over the past few years I have noticed that people who steal money from a company seem to get harsher gaol terms than a lowlife who has raped a few women. Is that fair? I don't think so.

    If I stole $500,000 from a bank without the use of weapons (introduces other factors, ie. intention to harm), do I deserve to get a longer gaol term than if I murdered someone?

    A crime against society is a crime against the people, white-collar crime does not seem to fit.

  • The vast majority of what is termed "white-collar crime" is fraud, perpetuated by business people against consumers. This includes heads of companies defrauding their stockholders by fixing the books/making false statements/etc.

    After that, the next largest category is embezzlement, which is an employee stealing from a company (the majority of these companies tend to be financial institutions of one sort of another).

    In the first case, it obviously directly affects people. The second case, it certainly hurts people, as the company that was stolen from loses profit, their stock may take a big hit, or in many cases, the business folds (which hurts the companies/people depending on the business, not to mention the stockholders).

    In the abstract, white collar crime also hurts society-at-large by causing them to lose faith in the economic "laws" that allows our country to run. If I have no confidence that a company won't steal or rip me off, why would I buy from them? Or invest in any company? If this attitude becomes widespread, how will we continue to run an economy?

    Here's a good example of bad improper punishment of white-collar crime: in the late 1980s, there was a huge wave of failures of Savings and Loan companies in the U.S. It turns out that a large percentage of these failures were due to fraudulent and/or illegal transactions being made by senior management of the S&Ls. It cost the U.S. gov't on the order of 500 BILLION to cover the costs of the bailout of these S&Ls - much of which had to come from tax money, since the insurance fund that the S&Ls were supposed to contribute to to cover this sort of thing was woefully underfunded.

    After this was all over, very few of those Sr. Execs were convicted of anything, and I think the worst thing I saw was a 5 year sentence.

    Your example was extreme, but do I think there are situations where someone guilty of a white-collar crime should get a sterner sentance than a murderer? Yup! I'd probably sentence the $500,000 thief to something at least as stern as someone guilty of involuntary manslaughter (say a fatal hit-and-run): about 5-10 years. They both are a Class B felony in the U.S., but I'm pretty sure that the latter crime would get at least twice as harsh a sentence right now.

    Tell me, who has hurt people more, one of those S&L Execs who's fraud cost the US $200 million to bailout his bank, or someone who stabs his wife to death in a drunken rage? Both are hideous crimes, but logically, the first hurts society far more than the second.

    -Erik

  • Right! And that would be illegal. He's allowed to use the HP calc only standalone. He can't connect it to anything.
  • But as Tom reported, you don't want to get sloppy with that etching, and end up dissolving the tiny contacts themselves along with the traces.

    --
  • once again I am apalled at tom's blatant attempt at getting more banner ad impressions. He broke down what could have been 2 pages of content into no less than EIGHT pages. On each of those eight pages, there are 2 banner ads, plus 2 plugs for cnet.com... I understand his desire to profit from his web site, but this is rediculous!
  • by trims ( 10010 ) on Wednesday July 12, 2000 @04:14PM (#938785) Homepage

    It's good to see that the probation office took a more reasonable stance on his lecturing and consulting. Though I suspect that he'll be carefully watched at the consulting gigs.

    However, the comment about not allowing Kevin to use any computers is grossly misleading. The limitations are against any Programmable electronic device, and even then, it's up to the probation officer about what is or is not allowable. Kevin can use an HP calculator, a microwave, an even (i'm pretty sure) an ATM machine. Anything that he can reprogram for dastardly ends (or use to reprogram an otherwise "legal" device) is out. Given the crime he's on probation for, this is logical, reasonable, and appropriate.

    Also, a note to those crying about restriction of his Inalienable Rights: as a convicted felon, he has lost the right to many of his "Rights". He may get them back over time (e.g. when his parole is up), but right now, as part of his punishment (and ALL FELONS are subject to this), he loses many of the rights normal citizens enjoy:

    • No Right of Free Association.
    • Restrictions on his Free Speech.
    • Loss of Voting privileges.
    • Less immunity to Unreasonable Search.
    • Loss of the right to bear Arms.

    I've missed a few, but you get the point.

    Believe me, you don't want to be convicted of a Felony in the U.S. - it's a serious cramp on your future.

    -Erik

  • This vigilante sort of attitude you gives real hackers a bad name.
    I think its better to channel black hat whims into something like overclocking than teardropping Winboxes.
  • Would AMD have ever made it this far had their loyalists not bought the AMD 586 to overclock it, the K6-2 to overclock it

    overclock a k6-2? are you mental? are you trying to melt the polar ice caps?

    586 i know little about other than it sucked for speed, so might as well overclock it to make you feel like you weren't taken for a ride.
  • by Ig0r ( 154739 ) on Wednesday July 12, 2000 @04:18PM (#938788)
    He could use some telnet software for his HP calc (there is such a thing) and use a modem to dialup to a unix shell (this can be done) and do some 'dastardly' deeds.
    But that's all just speculation :)

    --

Of course there's no reason for it, it's just our policy.

Working...