Submission + - German "Die Piratenpartei" (Pirate Party) gets 2% 1
the_doctor_23 writes: "The German Piratenpartei managed to win 2% of the votes in yesterdays federal election.
While they will not be represented in parliarment due to a 5% minimum threshold,
this is none the less a remarkable feat for the young party modeled after Sweden's Piratpartiet.
According to polls the pirates attracted as many as 13% of the first time voters."
While they will not be represented in parliarment due to a 5% minimum threshold,
this is none the less a remarkable feat for the young party modeled after Sweden's Piratpartiet.
According to polls the pirates attracted as many as 13% of the first time voters."
Comment Re:Defend patents (Score 1) 391
I do believe this is what they are doing...
Submission + - Google Deletes Rogue Ads, Dangers Persist
An anonymous reader writes: Google has removed ads that appear alongside Google search results that re-directed users to malicious sites. But, according to security experts, the fix is temporary and search engine users should not assume sponsored links are all trustworthy.
http://blogs.pcworld.com/staffblog/archives/004248 .html
"Search engines are just too easy a target for bad guys," says Roger Thompson of Exploit Security Labs. On April 25, Exploit Prevention Labs reported that malware distributors were using advertisements placed via Google's automated AdWords system to infect unsuspecting end-users with spyware designed to capture bank login user names and passwords.
http://blogs.pcworld.com/staffblog/archives/00424
"Search engines are just too easy a target for bad guys," says Roger Thompson of Exploit Security Labs. On April 25, Exploit Prevention Labs reported that malware distributors were using advertisements placed via Google's automated AdWords system to infect unsuspecting end-users with spyware designed to capture bank login user names and passwords.
Submission + - Writing a novel in a wiki?
An anonymous reader writes: Wikis are a great tool for online collaboration. But this guy took it one step further and wrote an entire novel in a wiki, and then got it published. It's possible that this is the first published work of fiction that was written entirely in a wiki.
Submission + - Mouse brain simulated on computer
Submission + - PGP for HTTP: the death of phishing?
An anonymous reader writes: I was reading an interview published in the Free Software Magazine about Enigform. Author claims that signed http requests can stop man in the middle and phishing. What does the Slashdot community think?
Submission + - Fred Fish Died
just another Amiga user writes: "It seems Fred Fish (Amiga Fish disks, gcc, gdb, binutils) passed away on Friday, 20 April 2007:
http://www.diveadx.com/ documents his cruises on a Nordhavn trawler.
http://www.amiga.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?p ost_id=441811&topic_id=37582&forum=22, look for the comment by his wife Michelle.
http://www.nabble.com/Fred-Fish-will-be-missed-t36 49533.html, by his son.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Fish, Wiki entry."
http://www.diveadx.com/ documents his cruises on a Nordhavn trawler.
http://www.amiga.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?
http://www.nabble.com/Fred-Fish-will-be-missed-t3
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Fish, Wiki entry."
Feed The Brain Processes The Sense Of Smell Better Than Previously Thought (sciencedaily.com)
The sense of smell is a surprisingly important way for rats -- and humans -- to gather information about their environment. The brain is able to adjust automatically to the demands of distinguishing between small differences in smell, new research shows.
Submission + - Activist Groups Drop Suit Against Viacom
Googlistic writes: Activist groups dropped a federal lawsuit against Viacom Inc. on Monday after the parent of Comedy Central acknowledged it made a mistake by asking YouTube to yank a parody of the cable network's "'The Colbert Report."'
Feed EFF drops Viacom suit over Colbert parody on YouTube (com.com)
Blog: The Electronic Frontier Foundation has dropped a lawsuit it filed on behalf of a group that posted a parody video of ...
Feed Viacom Promises To Be More Mindful Of Fair Use On YouTube (techdirt.com)
When Viacom took down 100,000 videos from YouTube claiming they were infringing, one problem was that there were a number of false positives where they forced videos offline that weren't infringing at all. In one case, the EFF and others sued over the removal of a parody of the Colbert report, and Viacom bizarrely claimed that it hadn't sent a takedown about it despite a ton of evidence that it had. Eventually Viacom admitted that it had, in fact, accidentally sent the takedown. In response, the company has convinced the EFF to drop the lawsuit after promising to manually review all videos before sending takedown notices, training those who review the videos to understand fair use and publicly stating that it has no problem with videos that are "creative, newsworthy or transformative" and are "a limited excerpt for non commercial purposes." In other words, it's basically everything the EFF wanted, and now we'll see if Viacom lives up to the promise.
Submission + - Shooting at Virginia Tech leaves at least 32 dead
Submission + - EliteTorrents Uploader Faces 5 Years in Jail
Mike writes: TorrentFreak reports: A man from Columbus, Georgia has pleaded guilty to two felonies connected to the distribution of copyright works via the EliteTorrents BitTorrent tracker, which was shut down by the FBI in 2005. As a major uploader he faces 5 years in jail plus a $250,000 fine.
Submission + - Forced RFID Implantation Illegal in North Dakota
JeremyDuffy writes: "From the "don't forget we're people, not products" department, North Dakota is the second state to ban forced RFID implantation. However, even if this is a step in the right direction, does it do enough? It doesn't ban voluntary implantation and last I checked a lot of things that aren't really "voluntary" are treated such under law. Here's a quote from the article of someone who agrees with me:
Another example, perhaps not so drastic. Companies push and push and finally get most everyone to use RFID implants as identification and method of payment. Because you're smart enough to know what a bad thing this is, you refuse, but find yourself inconvenienced everywhere. You can only shop at certain stores that still have non-RFID checkout. You pay an extra "cash handling" fee for not using the new methods. You have to drive 20 miles away to the only gas station around that's equiped to take non-RFID transactions.
Is it still a choice?
Note that both Spychips.com and Privacy.org are carrying this story and that Spychips lists Ohio, Colorado, Oklahoma, and Florida as more states with anti-implantation bills in the works. The first state to pass such a bill was Wisconsin (note the same flaw as the ND bill).
Before someone leaves a comment saying "well, you complain, but don't offer solutions!", here's the wording I would add to each of these bills:
"Futher, any company who offers RFID based services must also accept non-implanted RFID for those same services (ie, a RFID enabled card or token). Any company who offers incentive plans or otherwise implements hurdles, difficulties, or hardships for customers who chose not to use implanted RFID will be in violation of this law and subject to fines, per day per offense.
Any company who provides chip implantation services must make their customers aware of this law and have them sign a disclaimer before implantation. Should such a company be found to have misrepresented the law, minimized the law, or made it appear as if implantation were artificially superior in order to influence the customer to proceed with the implantation, that company shall be liable for the full cost of removing the chips at their expense and may additionally be fined or decertified."
There. That's a good start.
(Originally posted at http://www.jeremyduffy.com/forced-rfid-implantatio n-illegal-in-north-dakota/)"
It's a poor example, but the right idea. Instead, what if you are offered a high paying job and move your family to a new state, get settled and begin the orientation process for your new job. You find out that they require RFID implants for "security" (which has been proven to weaken security" ). How much free will do you have in this instance? Can you really afford not to take the job now? You'd have to have an almost religious mentality to refuse it at this point.But Michael Shamos, a professor who specializes in security issues at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, believes the law is too vague to do much good. For instance, it only addresses situations where a chip is injected, even though RFID tags can also be swallowed. And it doesn't clearly define what a forced implant really is; someone could make chipping a requirement for a financial reward.
"Suppose I offer to pay you $10,000 if you have an RFID [chip] implanted?" he asked. "Is that 'requiring' if it's totally voluntary on your part?"
Another example, perhaps not so drastic. Companies push and push and finally get most everyone to use RFID implants as identification and method of payment. Because you're smart enough to know what a bad thing this is, you refuse, but find yourself inconvenienced everywhere. You can only shop at certain stores that still have non-RFID checkout. You pay an extra "cash handling" fee for not using the new methods. You have to drive 20 miles away to the only gas station around that's equiped to take non-RFID transactions.
Is it still a choice?
Note that both Spychips.com and Privacy.org are carrying this story and that Spychips lists Ohio, Colorado, Oklahoma, and Florida as more states with anti-implantation bills in the works. The first state to pass such a bill was Wisconsin (note the same flaw as the ND bill).
Before someone leaves a comment saying "well, you complain, but don't offer solutions!", here's the wording I would add to each of these bills:
"Futher, any company who offers RFID based services must also accept non-implanted RFID for those same services (ie, a RFID enabled card or token). Any company who offers incentive plans or otherwise implements hurdles, difficulties, or hardships for customers who chose not to use implanted RFID will be in violation of this law and subject to fines, per day per offense.
Any company who provides chip implantation services must make their customers aware of this law and have them sign a disclaimer before implantation. Should such a company be found to have misrepresented the law, minimized the law, or made it appear as if implantation were artificially superior in order to influence the customer to proceed with the implantation, that company shall be liable for the full cost of removing the chips at their expense and may additionally be fined or decertified."
There. That's a good start.
(Originally posted at http://www.jeremyduffy.com/forced-rfid-implantati
