stse

Most (all?) talks from 26c3 in several formats @ http://mirror.fem-net.de/CCC/26C3/

Mainly that "detonating PETN is actually very hard" and "no security system [...] on the planet, is designed to catch someone doing this". I remember his analysis to be more detailed than this, but maybe I remember wrong. There were also a post about the predator drone about a week ago, which had some good technical points, but in my opinion was poor from an intelligence perspective.

I think he should stick to writing about cryptography. I read his blog from time to time because of his expertise, but recent posts has just been filled with assumptions and speculations.

Similar app covering the Baltic region http://www.flightradar24.com/ which parses data from this system http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_dependent_surveillanc...

This topic is a few days old, but for the record. Yes patents: http://www.wired.com/politics/law/commentary/circuitcourt/20... ...and by other means: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2008/08/injunction-requ/ http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/06/atm-vendor-halts-ta... http://blog.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2006/07/fbi_arres... http://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/2001/07/45298

You could first try the ANY query (which won't return all records though) and then a whois query on failed ones to be sure. Combined with some smart caching and affiliate/click tracking (to see if a new domain gets registered).

I if remember correctly they mentioned during the 26c3 talk that they get 40% of their traffic from search engines.

If you want to know more about the future of wikileaks, check out this talk from 26C3: http://mirror.fem-net.de/CCC/26C3/mp4-ipod/26c3-3567-de-wiki...

It's not uncommon to stop publication of research by claiming copyright, patent, etc.

So you sent an e-mail to some public relations person at an interest group (gsm.ORG btw). You should approach your service provider or handset manufacturer, who (in theory) could take direct action as described in the presentation from ccc. This is one of the reasons for having an open phone.

Unofficial video torrents can be found at http://rnmshot.dvrdns.org/

I like this trend, but I have some reservations about the usefulness of the material. It's not generally suited for self studies, as it's made for a full time student and while the lectures and notes are open, the course ware isn't. As far as I know there's no easy way to take an exam or get a grade. It also seems hard for other teachers to use, as it doesn't contain any instructions from that perspective.

So while I like the initiative, I currently can't see any widespread usage for it and think it needs to evolve to become "truly" open.

Most authors don't know how to nor want to self-publish their books. Publishers also have extensive back catalogs. So even if a distributor (like amazon) started to provide the same services, they would have to compete with the publishers as they, as a distributer, would need the publishers back catalogs.

Wish I was there. This is THE European hacker conference.

Trace Detection Systems, like the GE EntryScan, are available. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0s9GuPMWh9A

I think there are two parts to this problem. First, there aren't any content delivery networks that currently can rival the traditional ones, not from a publisher perspective at least. Selling content through retailers is still the best way to reach a lot of customers. Second, don't underestimate the publishers need for control. That's what they do, they acquire rights to distribute things and distribute them.

So, what's the solution? Create a content distribution system that is easy(widespread, user friendly, open?) and let's the publishers control the distribution, but not necessarily by being involved. Whatever retailers, or wholesalers, should be a part of this is hard to say. But seems likely.

Expressen recently listed the "top" tax-payers in Sweden [1]. What's interesting is that the second wealthiest person in Sweden after Kamprad, H&M owner Stefan Perssson, tops the list and pays more tax than the ten following people combined. It's also interesting to find one of the investors in Skype at #4 and one of the founders of MySQL at #11.

http://www.expressen.se/ekonomi/1.1797308/h-m-miljardar-beta...

I think it's a shame they are using these kinds of aggressive tax planning tactics, while still marketing themselves as being Swedish/Nordic. And to put this view in context, Sweden does not have the same social system as the US. But this would be aggressive even for an American company.

I've found the more you do something, the more humble you become and the less you need to prove yourself. I don't know about academics, but I've found this to be true in the military, in business and in sports.

I would probably refer to it as a music protocol, rather than a music browser.

The best way to fight piracy is to "be ahead". The use of e-readers could be very beneficial to publishers. The price of an e-book should be much lower as there is no printing costs, easier distribution, no secondhand market, always in stock, no out of print. Just like with music, the way we consume books are going to change and we're going to want more for less.

I think the market focus has been totally wrong from the beginning. Why target a market were an e-reader offer only a similar or worse experience than a book and is way more of an investment.

In my opinion they should have targeted the student or corporate market first, where the potential to save money and the need to work with the text is higher. Things like comments and annotations could be distributed via a "social network" to colleges, documents could be auto updated to reflect the latest version and so on. Might be for technology/pricing reasons though, as there's currently only one manufacturer that can deliver e-ink (afaik).

I also think that Google (Google books/docs, Android) is in a far better position than Apple to evolve the e-reader market. But maybe someone like Adobe (pdf) could also be a candidate.

I think most people here agree that your business should be based on making innovative products, not imitation nor litigation.

I find it strange that copyright law is becoming more and more restrictive. Before the Internet it was a lot harder to violate copyright laws and also one had far less legitimate reasons to do so. I mean 10-15 years ago no one cared about old movies still having copyright, because there was no way to distribute or watch them in an effective way. Also there are "markets" today where it's virtually impossible to violate copyright, one being playstation 3 games.

Sometimes they even leave the encase cd behind ;)

http://translate.google.se/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl... (jar = computer)

As you seem so concerned with the "facts", a more accurate description would be a "hose bomb" as it's made with a garden hose or similar tubing. The effect is more of a firecracker than an actual bomb.

Anonymous networks doesn't really help if you are liable for traffic passing through you, like with recent actions against ISPs. I think the future is trust-based networks like friend-to-friend. When broadband speed averages increases, it will become feasible to relay traffic through trusted peers.

More info at http://www.acm.uiuc.edu/conference/2009/speakers.html and http://www.acm.uiuc.edu/conference/2009/schedule.html