] The agency, Judge Nottingham wrote in the 34-page
] opinion, "has chosen to entangle itself too much in the
] consumer's decision by manipulating consumer choice and
] favoring" charitable over commercial speech. Judge
] Nottingham's assessment of the FTC registry was blunt.
] The First Amendment, he said, bars the government
] adopting laws that give a preference to one type of
] speech over another when the content isn't significantly
] different. "Because the do-not-call registry
] distinguishes between the indistinct, it is
] unconstitutional under the First Amendment," he wrote.

This may seem like a loss, but its actually a win. Congress can't allow some telemarketers to call you and not allow others to call you. Having created this thing, they are in a political situation where they have to make it happen. In this respect the only way to legally make it work is to ban all telemarketing.

I don't really understand why the telemarking industry is making this arguement. They are making things even worse for themselves in the long run.

I'm not sure I agree with this ruling, however. This isn't a ban per say. Its a system that allows people to sign up and say "I don't want that." You are forced to comply with those requests and not send this stuff to people who don't want it. Aren't people's phones an aspect of their personal privacy? Shouldn't they be able to say "stop calling me," and charge harrassment if you don't? I don't think thats the same as a speech regulation. I would like to read this decision, if anyone knows where to get it.

Smartmoney.com: Breaking News: Another Court Rules Against FTC's 'Do Not Call' List

] "People in their 60's are burning CD's at home," said
] Gerd Gebhardt, the chairman of the German Phonographic
] Industry Association. "Housewives, who should be cooking,
] are burning. It's not like we can go after 80-year-old
] men or 12-year-old kids. We have to find the right
] approach."

German RIAA counterpart thinks women should stay in the kitchen!!

] I've attached a list of some of the other types of
] personal data that Goldshield sells such as credit
] card statements, telephone bills, unlisted phone
] numbers, and license plate information. My question:
] How is the company able to obtain this kind of
] information from banks, credit agencies, and
] telephone companies?

Buy anyone's phone bill!?

[Politech] How does Goldshield find credit card, phone call info on you? [priv]

] The Wollemi Pine, a plant from the Jurassic age which
] survived in a single isolated Australian grove, is set
] for an amazing comeback.
]
] It was once thought to be extinct, but in 2005 small
] plants cultivated from the pines will go on sale.

wilpig:
] While the story for this is neat. I just love the title of
] the article.

I think the meant potted.... Doh!

BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Jurassic pot plants on sale soon

] The Pentagon office that was developing a vast
] computerized terrorism surveillance system would be
] closed and no money could be spent to use those high-tech
] spying tools against Americans on U.S. soil, House and
] Senate negotiators have agreed. But they shifted some of
] the high-powered software under development to different
] government offices, to be used to gather intelligence
] from U.S. citizens abroad and foreigners in this country
] and abroad.

More good news!

Terrorism spying project to end

] Congress moved Wednesday to delay the planned takeoff of
] a controversial new airline passenger-profiling system
] until an independent study of its privacy implications
] and effectiveness at stopping terrorism can be completed.

Good news!

Wired News: Congress Puts Brakes on CAPPS II

Weblog run by some guy who is building a home made railgun. This was always the holy grail of geek projects, but we never seemed to have the time.

Jason Rollette Railgun Blog

] A computer security expert who contributed to a paper
] deeply critical of Microsoft has been dismissed by his employer,
] a consulting company that works closely with the software giant.

[Politech] Dan Geer loses CTO job at AtStake after criticizing Microsoft

Rattle just observed to me that Verisign's actions toward the Internet community were sort of like Bush's actions toward the UN. There may be more to that then you think. The moral standards of acceptable behavior are set by the leadership. If the leader says its ok to do a certain thing, then people will rationalize away any natural inhibition that they might have toward it. "He thinks its ok to do this and he is obviously smarter then me, so I'm going to ignore that nagging little voice and go ahead..."

The way we've been throwing our weight around and doing things that are of dubious responsibility simply because we can and the people who ought to check us really aren't in a position to do that.... Well that rubs off. A manager thinking of doing something this dramatic might have thought twice about it in a time when one feared reprisals from millions of angry people. That fear is the heart of democracy. You can't screw the people because they are collectively more powerful then you. You respect them.

I think we are in the process of loosing that fear.

Today, you take it when you can, and if millions are angry, fuck 'em, unless they have the power to do something about it, and you'll push back every step of the way. If you really are in a better position they are going to have to back down at some point...

Verisign is going to ignore new RFCs. They are going to ignore and fight ICANN rulings. They are going to push this and push this and push this.

Ultimately, unless some court orders them to put up, they will leave the engineering community with the choice of accepting their positions as owners of the internet, or fragmenting the internet so that no one can control it.

Verisign is betting that fragmentation is worse then authoritarian rule. It probably is in this case.

We just went through the new age of "boom," where everyone forgets that booms always bust. Now we begin the new age of empire, where everyone forgets that empires are always violently overthrown.

The reason we still have wars is that greed is more powerful then reason.

] On September 3, 2003 Sherman Austin surrendered himself
] to begin a one-year term in federal prison for the contents of a
] website that was authored by another boy and linked to Sherman's
] site, www.raisethefist.com, on a free-hosting area Sherman provided
] there. The other boy's site included a direct link to the "Reclaim Guide,
] a manual that provides crude instructions on how to build explosives.

Politech has been covering this story for quite some time, and I'm curious
what people on MemeStreams think about it. I've always been one step
away from memeing it.

This guy ran a left wing website on which he advocated violent action against corporations, government, etc... in response to globalization, and provided links to bomb making information. Diane Feinstein, for many years, has tried to make it illegal to post bomb making information on the internet. A few years ago she finally got one through, but only if you present it in a context where you intend that it be used to commit a violent crime. This guy was the first person to ever be prosecuted for it. The prosecution didn't ask for much in the way of sentencing. The judge, apparently, was appalled by that and gave the kid a year. Feinstein was also appalled at told the DOJ to use this law more often.

The reason I haven't memed this before is that this guy, regardless of what his friends are saying, really is guilty. I went through his website when this started. He was actually advocating violence and linking to bomb making information.

Should this be illegal? Well.... What if he was Osama Bin Lauden? OBL does the same stuff. He advocates violence for political reasons, and he provides information (and training camps) for people who answer his call. I think what OBL does ought to be illegal. Should what Sherman Austin did also be illegal? What is the difference?

Well, the most obvious difference is that OBL actually has people that listen to him and go through with his direction, whereas this raisethefist website was mostly the immature ramblings of an angsty teenager. No one has actually connected it with a real crime. Maybe its only illegal if people listen to you? Seems like a questionable distinction. Your actions and intents are the same. Should success be the measure of a criminal mind?

There is another difference. That is that OBL is involved in planning (and, furthermore, coordinating and funding) SPECIFIC actions, whereas Austin gives you a motive and some tools but leaves the details up to you. Is this where we should draw the line? It certainly seems like a place where you could draw one.

If you want to do that, then consider this website:
http://www.earthliberationfront.com/

This website is basically the same as Austin's in that it advocates violent (or is it just destructive?) action and provides tools. The LEGAL difference between this website and Austin's, in terms of t... [ Read More (0.3k in body) ]

The legalities of bomb making information on the internet....