Posts by Stephen Judd
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
[deleted what I now realise is a spoiler for a perfectly recyclable joke].
-
*hovers above calendar with pencil and hopeful look*
-
I think... I think I agree with that!
-
But Joe (insert denigrating Noun here) Public, is a dedicated Hacker?
They don't need to be. They just need to use software written by people who are.
Maybe you could try understand what Matthew and I are saying: you can't make undesirable activity difficult without making kosher activity difficult too. We don't keep pointing out problems for fun or to be annoying, but because we think about this stuff as well.
-
Thanks for spelling that out. I understand what you're suggesting now.
I think it's unfair to expect a lay person to configure a consumer level device that way.
But granting that for the moment, I also think restricting particular kinds of packets or particular ports because of the perceived likely payload:
a) is unfair
b) does not in fact solve the ostensible problem (distribution of copyright material without permission of the owner) and
c) can only work until it becomes widespread enough for people to start putting their dodgy payloads into packet/port combinations that look legit (and indeed that has already started happening).
d) if it becomes widespread, forces novel applications like, say, Skype, to do stupid things in a technical sense: collateral damage if you like.... so I oppose telling people do that anyway, even if they are capable.
-
Quite the opposite, I would say. I really don't know what you envisage by "put obstacles in place", but I can't think of anything effective that wouldn't be annoying to everyone. That could be my lack of imagination though.
Also, supposing for the moment that one could selectively allow some kinds of activity and not others, that might actually have the opposite effect to the one you suggest -- an ill-willed person might argue that if you (inadvertantly) allow access to some copyrighted material, you meant to do so as a matter of policy (you know, common carrier vs editorial control kind of thing).
If you could actually be a bit more precise about what you have in mind that would help the discussion.
-
it can't be that hard
I think that kind of blithe assumption is one of the factors in the intense heat generated in these debates.
Steve, blocking any category of thing in a reliable and fair way is very, very difficult.
Whitelisting (only allowing things on a list) and blacklisting (disallowing things on a list) are problematic: who looks after the list, how is it kept up to date, what if the list is wrong, what are the criteria for the list, how accurate is it? What happens when a site appears on a list and just moves somewhere else? What about network resources that host a mixture of things -- shall we block them all and lose the good with the bad?
Matthew Poole has already pointed out that real-time inspection of traffic is extremely resource intensive and generally unreliable.
Example: something as apparently easy as reliable spam blocking is damned hard. Spam messages still get through filters, legitimate messages still get caught in them (and the amount spent by IPSs on filtering is huge).
Blocking "objectionable" content is impossible. You can be sure that blocking "download sites" (whatever they are -- it's not a term in my vocabulary) is not a goer.
-
Ben: what a great thing that your boy has such a thoughtful old man -- in my mind's eye I see him wrestling with the watering can. That choked me up, it did.
-
*blinks* *massages forehead with knuckles* *hopes "naturally sociable" is not code for "drank too much and would not shut up."*
That was a good night, wasn't it? I resisted the urge to kidnap Bob for my Unspeakably Adorable Toddler collection, but only just. As for the adults, I am assuming that Russell has some sort of concealed device that lures clever and engaging people from their hiding places so they can be plied with liquor and anecdote.
I'm a bit hungover but already cheered up by watching Kathy's face as she reads the Reserve Bank Annual introduction.
gio: yeah, the guy with Jack Elder's tattoos was Jack Elder. I should have introduced you, being naturally sociable and all.
-
Well done with the Terry Hall segment.