RonKaminsky’s Techdirt Profile


About RonKaminsky

RonKaminsky’s Comments comment rss

  • Apr 15th, 2014 @ 10:27am

    "so intent"?

    > Congress was so intent on providing safe harbors

    I wasn't there when the DMCA managed to get through, but given what I've been seeing about Congress recently, it seems to me to be equally likely that they were just "so intent" on pushing something through, so they could continue to collect big campaign contributions from certain lobbyists...

  • Mar 22nd, 2014 @ 10:08am


    I find your comment simultaneously both insightful and ironic, since the "mentality" of copyright most often resonates with the philosophy of "moral rights" (which is widespread in Europe) rather than the relatively strict view of copyright as an economic issue which is mostly found in US law.

  • Mar 19th, 2014 @ 5:35pm

    Re: orly?

    > which are not insignificant and which also kill
    > lots of people every year

    Could we have references for this, please?

  • Mar 19th, 2014 @ 5:25pm

    Re: Re: Re: orly?

    Do you always feel an urgent need in public forums to repeatedly post over and over again, in a futile attempt to drown out other opinions, rather than actually countering them?

    Your understanding of science seems limited. For example, why did you post an "op-ed" piece from the BMJ as evidence? You don't seem to realize that in order to come to a conclusion, you have to review the whole body of scientific literature on a subject, rather than just cherry-picking?

  • Feb 19th, 2014 @ 12:07pm

    Re: Re: We should be continuing with nukes

    Ever thought of, say, backing up your statements with evidence, or learning some critical thinking skills (never mind science knowledge, which you also seem to woefully lack)? Myself, I'd say that nuclear regulation is about the only sector of government where public pressure manages to counterbalance the growing power of industry (with the result varying from country to country).

    I have to admit the "superpowers and spandex" was witty, tho.

  • Feb 14th, 2014 @ 1:36pm

    Gotta try this

    Let's invent an algorithm for generating a sequence of random fallback tracker URLs, similar to the algorithms for C&C URLs for botnets --- but let's make sure that it involves using some information from all/any of the *AAs websites.

    Then, by the same logic, the court would have to ask for those websites to be similarly expunged. This outcome might "help" the court understand that such a ruling is not a good idea...

  • Feb 11th, 2014 @ 3:20pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    Hmm, "ssh"... "Washington D.C."...

    Brings to mind: NSA. You probably share an ISP and similar location to someone who's connected to someone who's suspicious, eh?

  • Jan 30th, 2014 @ 3:00pm

    Re: Re: Explanation is unclear

    > I think heís using SHA-3 because thatís the anointed
    > new trendy hawtness from NIST

    I guess he missed out the part where NIST "suddenly" wanted to reset the security parameters of SHA-3... anyone following the recent news wouldn't think of SHA-3 as a stellar candidate for being an essential part of a stego algorithm.

    Or did the NSA tell them to do that to try to make us think that the original parameters were "too hard" for them? Inquiring minds want to know!

  • Jan 30th, 2014 @ 1:23pm

    Re: Explanation is unclear

    Well, if it's anything like the version I thought up independently, the algorithm only uses a limited number of bits of the result of the hash function, enabling a brute force search to (sometimes, since there is no reason, except statistics, to expect that this would be possible) invert what would ordinarily be, as you said, an uninvertible function.

    (In addition, one would probably prefer to use SHA256 nowadays instead of SHA3, since fast hardware is readily available to accelerate such an inversion of SHA256 --- namely, any Bitcoin mining setup.)

    I'm off to check it out. I hope his work is an improvement on my own --- it'll save me a lot of trouble getting my own into publishable form.

  • Jan 26th, 2014 @ 9:20am

    Bye, bye, net...

    So, by your logic, if there exist two countries in the world with Internet access but mutually contradictory laws, no Internet sites are legal?

    That sounds practical...

  • Jan 5th, 2014 @ 12:35pm

    Re: Re:

    Not only are you correct about the improper comparison, I would like to point out that anyone really serious about shutting down a facility like the one which was attacked could easily gather intelligence from an unmanned drone, and then attack it with, for example, bombs/grenades launched from a small truck-mounted catapult. Or even possibly just with small rockets designed to drop metal cables in the proper locations --- no explosives necessary.

    Spending money to defend against the chance of someone attacking would almost certainly not be cost-effective, however, unless the likelihood of such attacks would increase dramatically. How unfortunate that human psychology is irrationally biased towards favoring safety against vanishingly rare but dramatic risks and ignoring common, small ones (like having less money because electricity is more expensive).

  • Dec 17th, 2013 @ 2:21pm

    Re: Try software

    > I'm sure they have considered that feature for
    > copies that fail their legitimacy check.

    Considered? Yes. Conclusion? It's better that home users pirate our stuff, so we maintain market dominance. Gates once admitted that MS greatly preferred that the Chinese pirate Windows rather than them adopting/developing a replacement.

  • Nov 16th, 2013 @ 6:34am

    Easy target for civil disobedience

    Someone should start a civil disobedience campaign where at every showing of every movie, one or more people hold up their switched-off or screen-blackened-not-recording phones as if they were recording. I think the cops would get very, very sick of coming to investigate for no reason, and the movie theater owners might actually figure out that the "enforcement" loses them customers.

    I also wonder how this could be enforced in Canada --- if copying for fair use is a consumer right, there, then if someone records, say, 20 seconds of a movie, I don't see how they could be prosecuted.

  • Nov 14th, 2013 @ 3:26pm

    I prefer: Creator's Usufruct

    I personally prefer the term "creator's usufruct", in that it emphasizes that what is being milked for income belongs to society, not the creator herself. (Besides which, "usufruct" has such a "woody" sound to it...)

    Of course, this inversion of rhetoric will probably never see wide use, since: (1) most content creators are too self-centered to adopt it, (2) most content gatekeepers are too savvy to allow language usage to undermine their current rhetorical advantage, and (3) usufruct isn't actually a universal legal concept, but rather a civil law concept.

    (Please don't take this post to mean that I support the current form or terms of these usufructs; this is about terminology, only...)

  • Nov 14th, 2013 @ 11:33am

    Well, bully for Judge Chin, _this_ time

    Well, well... I had been a bit apprehensive after the opinion he filed in the Aereo case, but can now breathe easier...

  • Nov 14th, 2013 @ 10:57am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: So let me get this straight...

    I think he would have been OK if he had only recorded his side of the conversation from the start using a second recorder located in the same room with him, far from the telephone.

  • Oct 4th, 2013 @ 12:25pm

    Re: Re: Who to manage this output

    > Subscription-based publishers argue that OA publishers are
    > merely check-cashing operations

    They would, wouldn't they now... Are you talking about the "expose" done by Science magazine (as seen on Slashdot)?

    As many people on Slashdot noticed, this study only answers the question "Are there open-access science journals which are substandard?" and not the real question which is "Are there proportionally more substandard open-access journals compared to traditional ones?". For example, it is well-known that some traditional journals have been mere fronts for special interests (e.g., pharmaceutical companies).

    Your idea about copying reputation models from the Web is quite interesting, I have to admit I thought about that also.

  • Sep 20th, 2013 @ 8:52am

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Does it have a good ending? Are the police limited to slapping him only with little tiny fish, until he gets a "big fish" court ruling to knock them into the water?

    (Oh, God, the copyright inquisition is gonna get me! Or maybe not, considering I expect it...)

  • Sep 20th, 2013 @ 2:32am

    NSA exposures may actually require compilation

    If a corporation is distributing GPL-licensed software like Linux, and it has become well-known that there is a significant chance that the NSA has corrupted Linux binaries, then in order to avoid legal liability the corporation might have to compile from source --- since the NSA backdoors wouldn't be GPL-licensed (presumably, and even if so, the corporation would be unable to distribute the sources to those backdoors).

    The companies actually contacted by the NSA would almost certainly be immune, however (if they were American).

  • Sep 12th, 2013 @ 12:10pm

    Re: OK, someone help me out here...

    If I remember correctly, before (3) happens, you get hauled into some kind of "court" (but maybe more like a review board), and they have to decide to disconnect you. The guy who was found responsible for his wife's infringements was also fined 150 euros if I remember correctly.

More comments from RonKaminsky >>