The problem with these proposals is they assume it is easy to determine if a site is actually infringing without a real, live person visiting the site. Also, because some of the content may be infringing on a site does not mean all the content is infringing. The practicalities of such a search would actually mean the easiest method for any search engine would be black list all movies and recordings. This is shooting oneself in the head to treat a pimple.
Reading any historically importany work is valuable in understanding history. While I have not read Mein Kampf, I can see value in reading to understand the Nazi ideology. People jumping to conclusions is the problem; reading ideological work does not make one an adherent.
If you are announcing new paid features they should by always be opt-in. Not for any legal reason, I am sure opt-out notices are legal in the US but for customer relations. Angry customers complain and leave for competitors and you get articles such as this. If someone asked me about Network Solutions I would not recommend them based on this.
Recently the area were I live had severe weather. At least one of the local channels had continuous coverage of the weather for the entire period. At the height of the severe weather they did not break for commercials for at least 90 minutes. Once the severity began to subside did they follow other weather related stories such as blocked roads for at least another 90 minutes. After the weather subsided the went to regular programming. If I know severe weather is coming I know that the at least one local channel will continuously cover it. I will know if there are any tornadoes, intense thunderstorms, etc. and what they are doing.
I have no need for the Weather Channel for my local weather and I very rarely watch them.
Actually if I found a security hole I would sue for gross negligence and fraud if I had standing to sue. Otherwise I would shut up. I think a couple of big lawsuits lost with the possibility of managers doing jail time for fraud and/or racketeering would make the PHB more apt to act.
The problem is the NSA has forgotten that backdoors can be discovered and used by the bad guys. But the bad guys will not tell anyone they have discovered the backdoor. So we are left with a situation were no one can say how long some bad guy has been snooping via the backdoor.
There seems to a certain arrogance or more accurately stupidity by the NSA. No one is smart enough to look for any backdoors or security holes and definitely not smart to use them seems to be their belief. My assumption is the bad guys know about most of the insecurities and backdoors and are actively exploiting them.
Re: Re: The problem with government run healthcare
Obamacare is not really affordable for the chronically ill due to the its financial structure. The deductible/co-pay/premium balance is idiotic. Affordable premiums with assistance have ridiculously high co-pays and deductibles while ones with more reasonable co-pays and deductibles have idiotically high premiums. The overall situation for the chronically ill has not really improved; just got screwed a new way.
Agree to an extent. I think the problem is often with the local leadership. If the local leadership will not tolerate the Gestapo tactics and behavior then these problems generally do not occur. However, if they do tolerate Gestapo tactics this what eventually results. Also, once trust is destroyed it takes a lot of effort to rebuild it.
One item that stands out is the NSA appears to believe the Chinese, Russians, Germans, Indians, etc. are too stupid to find their backdoors and keys. Maybe not immediately but eventually. Encryption and code-breaking have been a technical race for a long time with one side gaining the upper hand then losing it. To think any encryption/security system is unbreakable or the other side is too stupid to crack yours is asking for a disaster.
Since most online activities mirror offline activities these companies do not need a "Chief Internet Officer". They need to look at what they do and some how mirror the important customer and vendor facing activities on to the Internet. Yes, there will be team of programmers/designers needed to put the website up and maintain it.
There are three basic activities a site could fulfill: point of contact for customers, point of "sale" for customers, and point of contact for vendors. The importance of each varies, so there is no one solution but what a company does offline should be an excellent guide to what they need to online.
What I want to see is the sales curves for books, films, and recordings. My suspicion is that upon first release there is spike in sales with a decrease in sales until a very low rate of sales is reached. For the statistically inclined I wonder if a Weibull distribution would fit the typical sales curve. Also, at what point in time have 95% and 99% of the total sales have been reached.
For example if the 99% sales figure is reached within 5 years I would set the maximum copyright length at 10 years with no renewal. My argument is that you have made virtually all the money from the vast majority of works so there is no reason to extend the copyright period for the very few works the retain some popularity.
Another way to look at this issue is how many very popular works does one remember for 10 years or 15 years ago? Of all the works produced, there may be a couple hundred that still have any popularity today. And thousands were produced?
The first screenings were to stop hijackings not terror plots. In the early to mid 70's there were many hijackings to Cuba. I do not remember any passengers or crew being harmed it was a major nuisance. So the goal was to prevent a hijacker from smuggling guns and grenades on to the planes. This goal was met because it was more difficult to hijack a plane to Cuba.
Expanding the program to stop terrorism was a knee-jerk reaction to 9/11. Terrorists do not care how they kill only that they kill many innocent victims. Also, trying to prevent all terrorist attacks is impossible because they are attacking and they can choose the time and place of any attack. No matter how vigilant one is unfortunately successful attacks will occur.
AC, I suspect most of the planning for these attacks was probably done in face-to-face meetings. The meetings minutes, if they existed in a written form, were not distributed electronically. Thus there was very little electronic trail to follow.
The fallacy of the NSA's spying methods is it assumes all communications and plans will be set by email and discussed over the phone. Anyone with any sense knows this is stupid even without any knowledge of the NSA's efforts. As much as possible the planning will be done in a manner so that SIGINT is useless. One of the reasons the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was a success was that the actual plans were never sent by radio to the units involved. Thus, the SIGNIT from reading the diplomatic codes did not indicate the attack targets only that war was imminent. Any terrorist who has read the history of SIGINT would know to avoid sending any plans, etc. in a manner that could be easily intercepted.
I suspect the origin was the NSA had difficulty uncovering any terrorist activity by targeted monitoring of various groups. So they assumed if they monitored all communication they would find the activity. Two problems need to be addressed: the assumption that the terrorists needed to always communicate via electronic means and adding more chaff is going to make finding the needle easier. The first issue assumes the terrorist planning cannot occur mostly in person or via letters and packages. Most terrorist attacks are not planned like military operations or use large numbers of people. So coordination is much easier and less likely to need extensive electronic communications. Adding more noise only makes it harder to find the signal since the vast majority of all communications has absolutely nothing to do with any threat to the anyone.
I submit the most likely way a plot would be discovered is not by monitoring electronic communications Other activities such as purchasing usually large amounts of fertilizer or other chemicals not typically purchased in the quantities needed or at all by the average person for any innocent purpose are more likely to the tip-off. Often these weird purchases are reported by suspicious store clerks.