betawolf33

http://bæta.net/resources/documents/ocr_nyt_hw.txt

Some interesting snippets:

Violence:

> Harry Gerber, 25, of 69 East 115th Street, went to Harlem Hospital for treatment for injuries received in fighting off straw hat vandals at 115th Street and Park Avenue. When a crowd of boys tried to seize his hat he put up a fight and was badly beaten and kicked.

Courtroom drama:

> A. Silverman was sentenced to 3 days in jail by Magistrate Peter A. Hatting, in the Night Court. On Thursday Magistrate Hatting had given warning that he would impose jail sentences upon any one brought before him on the charge of smashing straw hats. Abraham Birnbaum of 522 Lavionia Avenue, Brooklyn, appeared in court as the complainant against Silverman.

> Just before he sent Silverman to jail, Magistrate Hatting discharged Sikeowitz, the youth arrested at 116th Street and Lexington Avenue. The Magistrate was about to send Sikeowitz to jail despite the intercedence of Oldbaum, the complainant, when the sight of the prisoner's gray-haired mother, 70 years old, caused him to relent for her sake.

> "But I'll sent the next one to jail," said the Magistrate. "I intend to see that citizens are protected in their property." Silverman was the next one.

A range of ages:

> Patrolman James Sheehan of the Oak Street Station arrested two boys whom he saw smashing a straw hat at First Avenue and Seventh Street. The boys said they were Walter Shulka, 13, of 102d East Seventh Street, and Abraham Silverman, 12, of 94 East Seventh Street. They will be arraigned in the Children's Court today on the charge of juvenile delinquency. An hour later Patrolman Sheehan arrested Abraham Moses, 15, of 810 East Nineteenth Street, at Tenth Street and Avenue A, on the same charge.

(see: http://www.caitlingreen.org/2015/04/thanet-tanit-and-the-pho... )

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Pail_of_Air

http://www.baenebooks.com/chapters/0743498747/0743498747___6...

One thing that this would be good for is almost by default members get experience working with the technologies the site is running -- they learn to use Github, deploy node.js, etc. It gives them a working technology base for their own projects.

One problem I foresee is that without a clear discussion about where the site is going, it could quickly become rife with lots of poorly-interacting features. Another is that delays in merging might well turn away valuable members.

Still, interesting project.

To apply an example: If this resistance was trained into the British public, and the Germans marched into London and declared themselves conquerers, the population would ignore them. When they are ordered to build factories here, to report to detention centres there, they would simply refuse to. Threats and demonstrations of force aimed at extracting compliance by brutalising certain segments of the population would be disregarded by the rest of the population[1].

Supplies for the conquerors would go missing or never be produced. They would have to rely on their own manpower to oversee all operations at gunpoint. As soon as the men with guns are called away somewhere else, work stops, workers disappear.

Any population which could respond in this manner would be unconquerable not in terms of territory, but in terms of spirit, which I believe is the sort of thing Ghandi was after.

The degree to which you could ever implement this system is dubious. I'm not sure you could get large groups of people to act that way. But if you could, it would be very effective.

[1] This is the bit I find hardest to see in practise.

2) If they're looking for it (see above) then an imperfect filter just means they don't find the known, safe sites.

3) Yes, it does. It is your right as a parent to decide what's appropriate for your child. It's not your right as a parent to force other people in households without children to report to a government-friendly list about their sexuality.

4) Well, such restrictions can still exist online. Paid porn sites can prevent the underage getting access. But really, why do we do this? Why is a young teenage girl or boy to be prohibited -- by law rather than parental consent -- from seeing sexual content? You say the internet should fall in line with these restrictions, but maybe those restrictions should be done away with.

http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Charmander#Type_effec...

Yet there was an attack (on an older version of Tor) published openly not long before this paper was written. (http://www.onion-router.net/Publications/locating-hidden-ser...)

Ludovico Sforza, Leonardo's employer, was actually a regent ruling in the stead of the rightful Duke of Milan. When the young Duke came of age, Ludovico refused to hand over power, so the rightful Duke got the King of Naples to support him.

In an unfavourable position, Ludovico panicked and appealed for help from outside Italy, inviting the French in with promises of support for their King's claim on Naples. In the ensuing chaos (which included him turning against the large French army), his challenger (the real Duke) was poisoned and the King of Naples (the real duke's sponsor) died. It looked good briefly, until the French king died. His successor, Louis XII, turned out to be related to the recently-assassinated young Duke (which importantly meant he had a hereditary claim to Ludovico's position).

Ludovico had by now irritated almost everyone. He had set a precedent for French inclusion in Italian warfare, irritated most of his neighbours (including the Pope) and betrayed the French army he had promised to support.

When the French -- already a dominant military power -- came for Milan, they had the backing of both Venice and the Pope. Ludovico just fled, Milan barely attempted to defend itself.

Leonardo stayed in French-occupied Milan for a while, before fleeing to Venice to take on some work there. Ludovico would be captured later, during an attempt to re-take Milan from the French with mercenaries.

Edit: The point involving Leonardo is that even if he had been capable of coming up with something crazy that made Ludovico more likely to win a few battles, the political situation was just too poor for victory to seem plausible. Ludovico sensibly fled rather than struggle against poor odds, Leonardo was never called on to help him fight the French.

He didn't build the canals, but he did make several observations and proposals for improvements which were taken up by other engineers after his death. These attempts were riddled with problems, though, and the work eventually terminated (I inferred unsuccessfully).

Best link I could find at short notice, unfortunately, the letter excerpt is two paragraphs in.

His one attempt at something lasting and challenging, a giant bronze statue of his employer's father on a horse, was delayed many times, lying unfinished for years, and finally put to rest by the French invasion. The seventy tons of bronze set aside for it were appropriated for cannons, and the clay model was used as target practice by the victorious French.

The problems Tor would bring users in terms of slow connection, risk from malicious exit nodes etc. would outweigh any benefit for most people. Combine this with the fact that to gain anonmyity from Tor you'd need to (at least) disable JS and session cookies, which many ordinary users will consider to break their browsing experience, and you'll find that really all this idea would do is put a lot more load on the Tor network. That's assuming a 'default on' option.

Perhaps an 'anonymous mode' version of 'private browsing' which switches the browser to a more secure configuration (like the Tor browser) and proxies through Tor would mitigate some of these problems.

This is essentially just a list of (presumably unblocked) proxies for the sites on their (quite short) list. They don't provide anything aside from ease of configuration (which admittedly might be worthwhile for some).

When the proxies get blocked, they'll have to either find replacements or shrink their list.

They are much better set up for dealing with the technically-inclined customer than mainstream providers.

He talks of the impossibility of the 550 (where has this number come from?) GHCQ and NSA analysts reading all this data. As if people are claiming that humans are individually watching it themselves. Even if they were, he completely ignores the obvious method: that machines under those agencies' control are the ones collecting this data, in favour of a hand-waving 'it's impossible'.

His statement that it's illegal for the NSA analysts to read these communications nicely sidesteps the strong evidence that they are doing it.

Even the focus of the article, the 21 million GB claim, tries to stoke up something much madder than what actually happened. The Guardian's reporting of the potential volume of data on the cables is not 'wild' in any sense. That the telephone game translated that potential figure into an actual one is not desirable, but also not particularly surprising. Notably, he doesn't take the opportunity to find out the actual average data rate on those cables and correct what he's criticising.

Of course, he also takes the opportunity to ladle on some criticism of Greenwald and the Guardian, and play up the 'it's a complex issue' angle which discourages any kind of public outcry.

The first, dated four days ago (and the only I see one preceeding this), is a title making some sort of claim about Booz Hamilton based on a whois lookup. Not exactly a quality submission, but it has nothing to do with Iran or hacking.

The other three submissions are all about what seems to be some news he's stumbled on about hacking/reverse engineering claims from Iran.

Considering this is 'Hacker' news, you can understand why he might think we'd be interested in this. Of course, it would be better form for him to write up an article explaining the separation or link between these items rather than posting lots of direct evidence.

None of that means he should expect to have his privacy breached by a US intelligence agency, and frankly your support for that on the basis of such a flimsy characterisation is blood-chilling.

A lot of people seem to have become alarmed because they've seen persian text and heard that it's about hacking. That's equally chilling.

Is this all it takes?

However, I agree that Reddit in particular could be doing more to spread the word.

People are calling this the 'largest online protest since..' but I'm not actually seeing much in the way of protest. I'm skeptical that those not interested in the subject are seeing anything.

Non-authoritative answer: Name: www.spectaclecases.co.uk Address: 83.170.88.134

Non-authoritative answer: Name: www.aglassescase.co.uk Address: 83.170.70.106

Presumably they have two different webservers, perhaps connected to the same ordering system/db server. I guess they could be using a virtualisation service and found this easier to set up.

I'm not sure how it works in the Netherlands, but in the UK you can claim unemployment benefits without having to have been paying taxes (so far as I'm aware). Surely people applying to PhD positions aren't so incapable of managing their finances that they require payment monthly rather than quarterly? That's the only difference I can see between a grant system and a salaried one.

Nowadays, we see a way to automate something a person does, and think that it'd better that way, despite a human mind being capable of much more than what a computer is capable of. The point of the story as I read it is that the power of new technologies can be illusory.