Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Woz Compares the Cloud and PRISM To Communist Russia

timothy posted about a year ago | from the privacy-and-private-are-not-unrelated dept.

Privacy 549

An anonymous reader writes "Some journalists ran into Steve Wozniak at the airport and asked him about iOS 7 and PRISM, where he made an interesting comparison about how the US is becoming what it once feared most. In communist Russia 'you couldn't own anything, and now in the digital world you hardly own anything anymore (YouTube video). You've got subscritpions and you already said ok, ok, agree and you agree that every right in the world belongs to them and you got no rights and anything you put in the cloud, you don't even know,' says Woz. 'Ownership was what made America different than Russia.'"

cancel ×

549 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Typo (0, Offtopic)

Alworx (885008) | about a year ago | (#44001277)

subscritpions

Good for Woz. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44001625)

I always did like that guy.

FIrst Post Maybe? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44001285)

In Communist Ammerica the Russians own you!

Russia? Please... they were amateurs. (5, Insightful)

Penguinisto (415985) | about a year ago | (#44001557)

Given the ruthless efficiency with which the PRISM system collected communications, I'd compare it more closely to the former East German (DDR) Stasi [wikipedia.org]

Re:Russia? Please... they were amateurs. (4, Insightful)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | about a year ago | (#44001851)

Given the ruthless efficiency with which the PRISM system collected communications, I'd compare it more closely to the former East German (DDR) Stasi [wikipedia.org]

Technically, if you believe the NSA has no direct access, the ISPs and Telcos actually collected the information and sent the NSA copies. [ So when James Clapper, was asked, "Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?" and he responded, "No" he wasn't technically lying to Congress... ]

Re:Russia? Please... they were amateurs. (2)

suutar (1860506) | about a year ago | (#44001937)

I'd think that the NSA asking for the data to be sent to them would qualify as "collecting". So the question is do they send a new request every three months when their warrant renews or are the telecoms just sending it out of the goodness of their hearts at this point? (Google's statements seem to indicate the NSA is asking, but of course, everything is subject to interpretation...)

Re:FIrst Post Maybe? (4, Informative)

Mike Frett (2811077) | about a year ago | (#44001735)

Communism in it's purist form as visioned by Karl Marx has never been implemented; he never really explained it either. But the way I read it, everyone would be equal; no rich, no poor and we all share things -- kind of like Open Source. It's actually not a bad thing if you like the Star Trek way of working not for money, but to better Humanity. It goes back to our Cave Man roots in a way.

But society has beat it into all of your heads that it's evil and wrong, which in the way the Soviet Union had implemented it -- It is. But like I said, it's never been implemented in it's true form and the Rich and Poor are too dug in to ever enact it. It's unfortunate because I wouldn't mind being truly equal and working to better ourselves instead of money.

Re:FIrst Post Maybe? (2)

Tokolosh (1256448) | about a year ago | (#44001801)

There is a difference between sharing and collaborating voluntarily, and "sharing" while looking into the barrel of a gun. In the voluntary case, you have the option of removing yourself from the group. Churches and their schisms are an example.

Re:FIrst Post Maybe? (1, Informative)

Grishnakh (216268) | about a year ago | (#44001925)

It's actually not a bad thing if you like the Star Trek way of working not for money, but to better Humanity.

Star Trek was a great show, but it had some real problems with the whole idea of money. In some episodes, main characters would laugh at the idea of money itself, as if no one had any money, and then in other episodes they'd talk about how many "credits" something cost. It was one of many huge inconsistencies in the show and the whole Star Trek universe. Go to YouTube and look for "star trek mistakes"; there's a whole series of videos showing giant consistency errors in the series.

Another one is the issue of genetic engineering. In DS9, the fact that Julian Bashir was genetically engineered becomes a huge plot point, because it's apparently highly illegal and has been for a long time (presumably since the days of Khan). But then there's a 2nd-season TNG episode where the ship visits a colony where they're genetically engineering kids with super immune systems which cause a mysterious contagious illness.

They couldn't even get straight whether Troi had ever kissed Riker with a beard or not: there's a bunch of episodes where she and Riker make out (and Riker has his beard), and then in the Generations movie he kisses her and she's disgusted by his beard and acts like he's never kissed her since he grew it.

Back to communism and money: the main problem here is how do you decide who does what job, and how do you get people to actually do jobs? Everyone wants the good jobs, and no one wants the shit jobs. Who actually wants to haul garbage for a living? Or clean toilets? Lots and lots of people would prefer not to work at all if they don't have to. How do you motivate people to do jobs that society needs done, but which everyone would prefer someone else do? If you give everyone the same amount of money so there's no rich or poor, you have to give them their paycheck whether they've earned it or not. If you withhold pay because they don't feel like doing the job they're assigned, then you're creating a wealth disparity, which is against the whole concept. The whole idea breaks down under just a little inspection.

Rant against the cloud on youtube? (-1, Troll)

Kenja (541830) | about a year ago | (#44001293)

Isn't that like a book proclaiming how bad literacy is?

Re:Rant against the cloud on youtube? (3, Informative)

SolarCanine (892620) | about a year ago | (#44001323)

Since Woz didn't post the video to YouTube, or in fact even make the video, not really.

Re:Rant against the cloud on youtube? (2)

fredprado (2569351) | about a year ago | (#44001357)

And even if he did he would still have the original copy...

Re:Rant against the cloud on youtube? (3, Insightful)

mcgrew (92797) | about a year ago | (#44001445)

Isn't that like a book proclaiming how bad literacy is?

It's not like Woz posted the clip. And I commend him for it, I couldn't have said it better myself. IMO the cloud is only good for things you want posted publicly.

Personally, I won't do online banking simply because the internet is an insecure form of communication, although I'll shop online with a credit card if necessary since the most it will cost is fifty bucks (and perhaps increased surveillance by the NSA if I buy the wrong book, like maybe 1984.) [csmonitor.com]

Speaking of which, the NSA is cooking up more CYA lies for us. [nytimes.com] Is anybody stupid enough to believe anything the NSA says?

Re:Rant against the cloud on youtube? (1)

spire3661 (1038968) | about a year ago | (#44001507)

Online banking is backed by physical entities. If an event happens it is often easily fixable. IM not saying run your life through online banking, but it is a useful tool backed by real-world interests.

Re:Rant against the cloud on youtube? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44001583)

Doesn't stop people from wearing tin-foil hats though.

Re:Rant against the cloud on youtube? (-1, Troll)

LVSlushdat (854194) | about a year ago | (#44001699)

Is anybody stupid enough to believe anything the NSA says?

I'll go a step further.. Is ANYbody stupid enough to believe anything this GOVERNMENT says??

Answer: Unfortuantly, a large number of "low information" people who are still bitching about Bush, when he's been gone for 5 flippin' years and the
new boss is FAR worse than the old boss. The only thing I see thats halfway encouraging is the fact that a LOT of people who voted for Obama are now learning
the mistake they made.. Not to mention, Americans who are awake and watching their country go down the shithole are getting pissed... Its getting REALLY close to being too late to do anything about it....

Re:Rant against the cloud on youtube? (4, Insightful)

robot256 (1635039) | about a year ago | (#44001761)

It would have been more of a mistake if there was any hope his opponent would have been better on these issues. Frankly, the only reason any Republicans are speaking out against the NSA is because it's Obama's NSA. They were just as complicit as the rest of us when they rammed the Patriot Act through.

Re:Rant against the cloud on youtube? (3, Insightful)

PRMan (959735) | about a year ago | (#44001767)

Have you learned that the next Republican will likely be no better? If not, then you haven't learned anything either.

Re:Rant against the cloud on youtube? (3, Insightful)

CayceeDee (1883844) | about a year ago | (#44001963)

I'll go a step further.. Is ANYbody stupid enough to believe anything this GOVERNMENT says??

Your entire rant is based on the premise that the Bush adminstration was so much better. They started the secret surveillance, but Obama gets the blame because he is still using it. Do you not see the cognitive dissonance here? I sure do.

Re:Rant against the cloud on youtube? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44001919)

Personally, I won't do online banking simply because the internet is an insecure form of communication, although I'll shop online with a credit card if necessary

Then you're a moron. It's far easier to steal someone's credit card information than to compromise their online banking credentials.

Mr. Wozniak... (3, Funny)

CodeHxr (2471822) | about a year ago | (#44001297)

Please come with us into the black van. NOW! *whack to head, covered with black bag*

Re:Mr. Wozniak... (2)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about a year ago | (#44001597)

Please come with us into the black van. NOW! *whack to head, covered with black bag*

Dear PTB:

DO NOT FUCK with the Woz. You cannot even begin to comprehend the forces you are dealing with.

That is, unless you want all of nerd-dom to come down on your ass like fucking Mjölnir.

Re:Mr. Wozniak... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44001693)

Dear CanHasDIY,

If I had a nickel for every person who bitched about me, I'd be... about twice as filthy rich and powerful as I am now, by definition.

No really, I reserve my black heliocopters for people who actually threaten me, or for fast Domino's delivery.

Besides, I've actually got a soft spot for Woz, he made the personal computer possible, and that has made my life a lot easier. Him and that Zuckerberg kid. Holy shit, people just slap blackmail and treasonous material on their own sites now. I used to have to forge love letters to get this kind of stuff. Thank God for the Internet and the PC. Easy spying, and some Call of Duty.

Oh wait... I forgot, those are actually real AC-130's I control. That explains why it didn't show a kill streak on my screen when I knew I vaporized that village the other day. That had to be 20 kills minimum. Is there an achievement for that?

Your friend (or else)
-PTB

P.S. Be seeing you.

Re:Mr. Wozniak... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44001947)

DO NOT FUCK with the Woz. You cannot even begin to comprehend the forces you are dealing with.

What forces? The stink of his flatulence? His rank B.O.? His shit breath?

As usual, Woz proves to be the guy who knows. (4, Insightful)

intermodal (534361) | about a year ago | (#44001321)

I'm not surprised to see that Woz has his head on straight enough to see that we've become what we feared. I can only hope that, despite the odds being against it, my countrymen will listen to this wise man. But history tells me that they'll ignore it, just like anything else they don't want to hear.

Re:As usual, Woz proves to be the guy who knows. (3, Insightful)

Black Parrot (19622) | about a year ago | (#44001431)

I suspect that the USSR was never so different from the way we were then as the propagandists would have us believe. Rigged elections? Media that didn't inform the public what was going on? Warfare and bullying as a way of achieving the top dog's "national" goals?

Re:As usual, Woz proves to be the guy who knows. (5, Informative)

perpenso (1613749) | about a year ago | (#44001547)

I suspect that the USSR was never so different from the way we were then as the propagandists would have us believe.

The people I know who lived under the Soviet regime vehemently disagree with such revisionism. For all its flaws and mistakes the U.S. was nothing like the Soviets, not even close, not even now.

Re:As usual, Woz proves to be the guy who knows. (-1, Flamebait)

LVSlushdat (854194) | about a year ago | (#44001755)

For all its flaws and mistakes the U.S. was nothing like the Soviets, not even close, not even now.

I agree, its nothing like the USSR *now*... Give Obama and his ilk free reign and in the VERY near future, that "not even close" will suddenly not be true any longer

Re:As usual, Woz proves to be the guy who knows. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44001881)

by "his ilk," do you mean politicians or Democrats? It makes a drastic difference in how right you are.

Re:As usual, Woz proves to be the guy who knows. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44001773)

I've known two people who lived under the Soviet regime. One was Jewish. Mixed experience. After WW2 they moved to a new town because they heard "we wouldn't be bothered there" or something like that. Of course that's a lot better than being loaded on a rail car. One of the more interesting stories he related to me was that of his GPs living in a rural area, most likely farming. One morning they see a cloud of dust on the horizon and the next thing you know a Red Army officer pulls up. "What are you doing here?" he inquires with urgency, "the entire German army is coming this way!". With that, they had perhaps an hour to take what they wanted and leave. He held dual Russian-Israeli citizenship, perhaps they didn't leave until after the Soviet union collapsed. I'm not sure how that worked.

The other one was a woman who was very much an apologist for the system. She was going on about "it was nothing like what you think, life was good, etc.". I chalk that up to Survivorship bias [wikipedia.org]

Re: As usual, Woz proves to be the guy who knows. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44001863)

Israel did not exist during WW2. So he had no such citizenship.

Re:As usual, Woz proves to be the guy who knows. (1)

timeOday (582209) | about a year ago | (#44001825)

I certainly agree with your point. But if the former Soviets you know don't live there anymore, it is a self-selected sample of people who disliked it enough to leave.

Re:As usual, Woz proves to be the guy who knows. (1)

perpenso (1613749) | about a year ago | (#44001953)

I certainly agree with your point. But if the former Soviets you know don't live there anymore, it is a self-selected sample of people who disliked it enough to leave.

Good point. However given the disparity between the number of people who desired to leave the Soviet system for the west and the number of people who desired to leave the west for the Soviet system, I'd say the above group represents a valid appraisal. Furthermore, having lived both under the Soviets and in the west they would seem to have a more informed opinion than someone who only lived in the west or never lived in the west.

Re:As usual, Woz proves to be the guy who knows. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44002027)

Furthermore, having lived both under the Soviets and in the west they would seem to have a more informed opinion than someone who only lived in the west or never lived in the west.

There was a great Russian writer [wikipedia.org] , who emigrated from the Soviet Union, who used to say: 'Communists I hate the most. But the ones which I hate even more are the anti-communists'.

Re:As usual, Woz proves to be the guy who knows. (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44001833)

> The people I know who lived under the Soviet regime vehemently disagree with such revisionism.

I was raised in Soviet Union and live in Russia. And I must say that Black Parrot is quite right.

Emigration from Soviet Union and from Russia was/is driven by various factors. People who emigrate tend to rationalize their choices, sometimes in really twisted way. Well, you really need to find a way to tell yourself that the leaving of your fatherland was justified, to live in peace with yourself. If you want to learn something about Soviet Regime, I'm afraid that an average Soviet (and Russian) emigrant is a wrong person to rely on.

I'm no apologist of USSR, but I must say that you western people have a really bizzare view of it that hasn't got much to do with reality.

Re:As usual, Woz proves to be the guy who knows. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44001877)

I'm no apologist of USSR, but I must say that you western people have a really bizzare view of it that hasn't got much to do with reality.

I'm no apologist for current U.S. gov't misdeeds, but the notion that the U.S. gov't was/is similar to the Soviet regime is also bizarre and hasn't got much to do with reality.

Re:As usual, Woz proves to be the guy who knows. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44001985)

I'm no apologist for current U.S. gov't misdeeds, but the notion that the U.S. gov't was/is similar to the Soviet regime is also bizarre and hasn't got much to do with reality.

Absolutely true. I should've elaborated on that. Actually, Soviet Union was so different from from current and former US, that it is really difficult to compare these countries. Most of the people in the US, as well as most of the people in ex-USSR don't even understand how skewed their vision of the former "enemy" really is.

However, I must say that the Soviet regime in was in some ways really better than you've accustomed to believe, that is for sure. And, in some ways the US has commited much more horrendous misdeeds.

-- parent poster

Re:As usual, Woz proves to be the guy who knows. (3, Insightful)

MacTO (1161105) | about a year ago | (#44002049)

I agree with what you say, however the propaganda of America about American's greatness and the propaganda of America about the Soviet Union's tyranny were also far from the truth. The two nations were closer than the American government would ever admit to, although nowhere near as close as the paranoid elements of society would claim.

The sad reality is that both nations were stuck in a paranoid mentality during the cold war. This resulted in a reduction of civil liberties. The situation was far worse under the Soviet regime, but the American government often committed acts that it claimed were the domain of communists and that had no place in their own free society.

We see something similar happening today, only in the name of terrorism.

Re:As usual, Woz proves to be the guy who knows. (1)

mcgrew (92797) | about a year ago | (#44001653)

I suspect that the USSR was never so different from the way we were then as the propagandists would have us believe. Rigged elections? Media that didn't inform the public what was going on? Warfare and bullying as a way of achieving the top dog's "national" goals?

Not back then, no, but certainly now. Vietnam and Korea were really part of the cold war, Eisenhower won by a landslide, Kennedy won the states you'd expect him to, as did Nixon in the 1960 election, and if the media had been a propaganda machine you'd never have heard of the Kent State Massacre, the police overreactions to the Chicago Seven [wikipedia.org] , and Pentagon Papers [wikipedia.org] would have never seen the light and Daniel Ellsberg would have never worked again, probably jailed, and possibly assassinated.

It started slowly with Reagan's "War on Drugs" and slowly got worse until 911 when the slippery slope became a steep cliff.

Re:As usual, Woz proves to be the guy who knows. (5, Interesting)

avgjoe62 (558860) | about a year ago | (#44001829)

When I worked in the Pentagon, there was a display case containing three pieces of the Berlin Wall. I never paid much attention to it - it was just something I passed by while walking to and from the office.

But one day I took some time and looked at the pieces. They were covered with graffiti. I distinctly remember a "Kilroy-was-here" and a lot of so-and-so loves so-and-so bullshit on the wall. Almost drowned out was the name of a young man on the top of one of the pieces, with his date of birth and the date of his death written below. And right below that was the phrase "Endlich frei" (Finally free). This young man was seventeen years old when he was shot for trying to leave East Berlin and travel to West Berlin.

There was a quantifiable difference in the ways the US and the USSR treated their citizens. And while that gap may be narrowing the fact that we are reading about this in the newspapers and debating this is a good thing. I remember a saying that was said during the aftermath of WWII - "If you want to know what atrocities the Russians committed, look in the graves. If you want to know what atrocities the Nazis committed, look at the receipts. If you want to know what atrocities the Americans committed, look in the newspapers."

Let's hope that always stays true.

Re:As usual, Woz proves to be the guy who knows. (1)

tnk1 (899206) | about a year ago | (#44001927)

The reason that I know that you are wrong is that you are actually writing this comment without a serious fear of being thrown into a KGB jail cell.

Yes, the USSR was different. If you don't understand how, please start reading some history. Start with the articles on the Cheka, proceed to NKVD, take a gander at Gulag. If you don't understand the difference then, please keep reading until you do.

Seriously, I know that the US engages in propaganda as much as anyone, but there are pretty objective differences involved. Both qualitative and quantitative.

Re:As usual, Woz proves to be the guy who knows. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44002019)

Haha, what? Yeah, not owning your data is exactly like not owning your house, car, food, and living under the possibility of sudden, immediate execution or exhile to a Siberian gulag!

We need anti-circumvention laws (1)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about a year ago | (#44001325)

We need laws that prohibit circumventing the law via technological means. DRM should not be able to take away rights like fair use or resale.

Re:We need anti-circumvention laws (1)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | about a year ago | (#44001383)

But what if they then circumvent those laws? Maybe an anti-anti-circumvention law circumvention law is in order...

Re:We need anti-circumvention laws (1)

Jeremy Erwin (2054) | about a year ago | (#44001523)

The cloud may be an end run around DRM issues.

I use two cloud services-- Apple's and Amazon's-- strictly for the purpose of syncing my computer, my kindle, my tablet and so on. It is very convenient to use the device best suited for my purposes at the time, and not worry about getting the data onto the device, and off it.

But even though they are often on the same LAN, exchanging a piece of data, no matter how trivial, somehow involves a sever half way across the continent, recording data for the NSA's pleasure, or rechecking a license, Why? Wouldn't it be a lot simpler if everyone could run their own server, dispensing documents as they pleased?

Re:We need anti-circumvention laws (1)

fredprado (2569351) | about a year ago | (#44001599)

Sure it would, but by providing you with this option the manufacturers would be renouncing some of their power over you, and so there is no motive for them to provide such solutions. At least until someone outside their club starts doing that.

Re:We need anti-circumvention laws (1)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about a year ago | (#44001613)

But even though they are often on the same LAN, exchanging a piece of data, no matter how trivial, somehow involves a sever half way across the continent, recording data for the NSA's pleasure, or rechecking a license, Why? Wouldn't it be a lot simpler if everyone could run their own server, dispensing documents as they pleased?

Easier for us; not easier (nor profitable) for the oligarchs who live for power and control.

Re:We need anti-circumvention laws (1)

CliffLandin (1394897) | about a year ago | (#44001783)

Easier for us, those who read Slashdot, but not easier for your average user that can barely sync their data through the cloud.

Re:We need anti-circumvention laws (1)

suutar (1860506) | about a year ago | (#44001959)

Unfortunately, fair use is not legally a right. It is simply a defense against accusations of copyright infringement. It is not a defense against other illegal actions, like circumventing an access control system. Sad, isn't it?

Obligatory (2)

aitikin (909209) | about a year ago | (#44001329)

In Soviet Russia...

Re:Obligatory (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44001539)

In Soviet Russia, Cloud compares PRISM to you!

Re:Obligatory (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44001657)

In Soviet Russia, you spy on Government!

In Soviet Russia (4, Funny)

dkleinsc (563838) | about a year ago | (#44001659)

Youtube watches you!
Google searches you!
Email reads you!
MS Windows boots you!
Facebook pictures you!
Text message receives you!

Ok, I'm done, anyone else?

digital take over (5, Insightful)

theatrecade (1080063) | about a year ago | (#44001339)

I agree with Woz. Nobody owns anything. Everything digitally is licensed. Even when you hold a physical copy in your hands it's on loan for 60$. You ever actually read a EULA? With the NSA spying on you on everything not only don't you own anything nothing is private anymore.. welcome to the new America! Welcome to the New World... I hope you enjoy your stay and by the way ignore that 4th amendment only the 2nd one kinda counts....

Re:digital take over (1, Insightful)

atriusofbricia (686672) | about a year ago | (#44001399)

I agree with Woz. Nobody owns anything. Everything digitally is licensed. Even when you hold a physical copy in your hands it's on loan for 60$. You ever actually read a EULA? With the NSA spying on you on everything not only don't you own anything nothing is private anymore.. welcome to the new America! Welcome to the New World... I hope you enjoy your stay and by the way ignore that 4th amendment only the 2nd one kinda counts....

And I'm going to have to disagree here. One might be able to argue that we don't 'own' enough in the digital realm vice it being licensed, but isn't that at least in part what is supposed to be so great about Linux and related bits?

In any case the comparison to Soviet Russia immediately falls on its face. I own my house, I own my business, I own my car and dozens of other things. It is annoying when people try and make comparisons between things when very superficially they are similar but they aren't even remotely close in scale or severity.

This isn't to excuse the NSA thing and related things as they are inexcusable. But to say that we've become Communist Russia because of digital licensing and such shows either profound ignorance or at least faulty logic. Communism has killed some 100 million people throughout history. How many people have been killed by EULAs?

Re:digital take over (2)

fredprado (2569351) | about a year ago | (#44001509)

If you consider "owning" as being able other people to use it, maybe what is lost is what makes Linux great indeed. But it is lost just for us, the common people, corporations and the government still have this right,

On the other hand, if you consider "owning" as being able to do whatever you wish with it, whenever you want, losing that has nothing to do with open source or Linux. It actually goes against what makes it great and the idea that made it come to be.

Re:digital take over (2)

fredprado (2569351) | about a year ago | (#44001519)

I meant "being able to prevent other people from using it" in the first paragraph.

Re:digital take over (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44001581)

Actually Russians in Soviet Russia could own a house and almost every other thing anybody could own in the West. Communism was/is about the ownerships of means of production (factories, land) and not pencils or cars. http://www.historians.org/projects/giroundtable/RussianAlly/RussianAlly9.htm [historians.org]

Re:digital take over (1)

cold fjord (826450) | about a year ago | (#44001589)

You also own the hardware that the software runs on, which isn't a lot of comfort. It's a pity that the common sense displayed by the old Borland company didn't carry forward.

Additionally, Borland was known for its practical and creative approach towards software piracy and intellectual property (IP), introducing its "Borland no-nonsense license agreement". This allowed the developer/user to utilize its products "just like a book"; he or she was allowed to make multiple copies of a program, as long as only one copy was in use at any point in time. -- Borland [wikipedia.org]

Re:digital take over (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44001603)

One might be able to argue that we don't 'own' enough in the digital realm vice it being licensed, but isn't that at least in part what is supposed to be so great about Linux and related bits?

Something is wrong if you own the hard drive but not the specific data contained within (not talking about all copies of the data everywhere, which is what's disgusting).

Re:digital take over (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44001751)

One might be able to argue that we don't 'own' enough in the digital realm vice

I would just like to take this opportunity to say that I support digital realm vice, as well as real-world vice, both amateur and commercial. The more vice we have, the better off I feel we are. It's yours; you should be able to sell it or give it away as it pleases you. Because yes, we do own it.

Re:digital take over (1)

theatrecade (1080063) | about a year ago | (#44001611)

In any case the comparison to Soviet Russia immediately falls on its face. I own my house, I own my business, I own my car and dozens of other things. It is annoying when people try and make comparisons between things when very superficially they are similar but they aren't even remotely close in scale or severity.

He said "when I grew up.." Russia was a completely different country back then. He is referring to the cold war era.

but isn't that at least in part what is supposed to be so great about Linux and related bits?

not everything that is Linux is open source and free. Linux it self yes maybe i should add the word "hardly"

Re:digital take over (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44001617)

In any case the comparison to Soviet Russia immediately falls on its face. I own my house, I own my business, I own my car and dozens of other things.

Do you? Or are you making payments on most of that stuff?

Re:digital take over (1)

femtobyte (710429) | about a year ago | (#44001733)

At least when you are paying for a car (that you bought with a loan), you are generally free to mess with it however you wish. Want to repaint it, or rip out the back seats for more trunk space, or fiddle with the engine? Go right ahead. Same with your house: the bank doesn't get a say in what home modifications you make. You're responsible for paying off the loan, but not for using your (not-fully-paid-for) property according to the mandates of bank management. Not so with software you "own" under a restrictive license or "cloud-based" system.

Re:digital take over (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44001901)

Same with your house: the bank doesn't get a say in what home modifications you make. You're responsible for paying off the loan, but not for using your (not-fully-paid-for) property according to the mandates of bank management.

They certainly do for my home, it's right there in my loan agreement. You do read those, right? The restrictions are quite practical and common sense. Effectively, I'm not allowed to do anything the would reduce the value of my home. I'm not bothered by it one bit, but they sure as hell have a say in what I do. Nothing as bad as a HOA. I'd never agree to one of those. They're much more like communism.

Re:digital take over (1)

FrankSchwab (675585) | about a year ago | (#44001923)

"fiddle with the engine" - well, not since, what, the '70s? Sure you can paint the airfilter, or put on a cat-back exhaust, but anything more substantial is illegal, and in areas (like mine) with smog checks prior to registration will get found.

I have a friend with a Miata that he put a turbo on. Every two years, he spends a Saturday afternoon swapping the ECU and re-plumbing the engine, takes it in for the mandatory smog check, then spends another Saturday putting everything back on. A bit too much fiddling for me.

Re:digital take over (1)

femtobyte (710429) | about a year ago | (#44002017)

but anything more substantial is illegal, and in areas (like mine) with smog checks prior to registration will get found.

However, these are typically not requirements imposed as terms of your car loan. Restrictions against making your car into a smog machine are more analogous to restrictions that you can't modify your computer to churn out spam or DOS attacks: emissions requirements are set by the larger community to regulate harms that impact that larger community. However, your computer software EULAs may prohibit you from using/modifying your devices in the privacy of your own home for activities with no impact on the general public, according to regulations set at the whim of a megacorporation rather than through any even nominally democratic process.

There's something we'll always own. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44001343)

At least we'll always own our own DNA

Re:There's something we'll always own. (0)

toonces33 (841696) | about a year ago | (#44001373)

No, there are companies out there patenting DNA as well, and that's another set of thorny issues.

Re:There's something we'll always own. (4, Informative)

Black Parrot (19622) | about a year ago | (#44001385)

Apparently SCOTUS just ruled that you can't patent 'natural' DNA.

Re:There's something we'll always own. (1)

pr0fessor (1940368) | about a year ago | (#44001503)

Wasn't there a story about that earlier? It looked like a small victory.

http://yro.slashdot.org/story/13/06/13/1550225/supreme-court-no-patents-for-natural-dna-sequences [slashdot.org]

Re:There's something we'll always own. (1)

cold fjord (826450) | about a year ago | (#44001621)

It looked like a small victory.

I love the smell of small victories in the morning. It almost makes up for being napalmed.

But can we trust Woz's judgement? (-1)

DumbMarketingGuy (171031) | about a year ago | (#44001355)

After all, here is a guy (who insists on using a juvenile nickname) who had the wool pulled over his eyes by perhaps one of the most successful psychopaths of this and the last century: Steve Jobs. Do you really think this guy is qualified? The analogy would be asking RMS for hygiene tips, or ESR for advice on your sex life.

I would be inclined to take everything this 'Woz' says with a bucket of salt.

Re:But can we trust Woz's judgement? (1)

Black Parrot (19622) | about a year ago | (#44001409)

After all, here is a guy (who insists on using a juvenile nickname) who had the wool pulled over his eyes by perhaps one of the most successful psychopaths of this and the last century: Steve Jobs. Do you really think this guy is qualified?

It's not obvious that Jobs snowed him; I suspect that they always had motivations and goals that were nigh orthogonal.

Re:But can we trust Woz's judgement? (4, Insightful)

johnjaydk (584895) | about a year ago | (#44001517)

After all, here is a guy (who insists on using a juvenile nickname) who had the wool pulled over his eyes by perhaps one of the most successful psychopaths of this and the last century: Steve Jobs. Do you really think this guy is qualified? The analogy would be asking RMS for hygiene tips, or ESR for advice on your sex life.

It wasn't more than a few years ago that we had a comment from a guy who shared office with RMS, who insisted that RMS had excellent hygiene so I would suggest you stick to car analogies. As to Woz, he might be a bit naive but he is a great engineer and his heart is in the right place. I would love to have more friends with those qualities.

Re:But can we trust Woz's judgement? (-1)

DumbMarketingGuy (171031) | about a year ago | (#44001839)

An example of RMS's excellent hygiene [youtube.com] .

Re:But can we trust Woz's judgement? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44001565)

Whenever you get knocked down to a -1 moderation, you're either an idiot, or you're talking about possibilities nobody wants to consider because they're just too scary.

I think your post qualifies as the latter.

Jobs has done his utmost to create legions of highly controlled pod people for fun and profit.

Re:But can we trust Woz's judgement? (-1)

DumbMarketingGuy (171031) | about a year ago | (#44001807)

Re: -1 moderation
This account appears to have been singled out for 'special treatment'. It always posts at -1 for some reason I have not been able to fathom. Perhaps it is the fabled 'bitchslap' that Taco used to apply to people with whom he disagreed. Perhaps it is a bug in slashcode. Who knows? I refuse to give up this account as it has such a low UID that it gives me credibility amongst all the non tech-savvy newcomers who have flooded slashdot in recent years.

When you see a six figure UID like mine, (particularly one which is less than 200000) you immediately think "Wow, this guy has been around for a long time, better pay close attention to his nuggets of wisdom", rather than when you see some schmuck with a 7 or even 8 figure UID you just think "n00b".

Anyway I will not stop spreading my knowledge to the masses, even if Taco does want to gag me. I REFUSE to be gagged.

His watch? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44001361)

Off topic from the discussion, but what watch is he wearing in the video? 1:51 has a good shot of it. It doesn't look like the Pebble, but perhaps another type of smart watch? ;)

Todd

Re:His watch? (1)

Jeremy Erwin (2054) | about a year ago | (#44001593)

It's an iPod nano watch.

Ha! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44001387)

How's Apple's walled garden any different?

Re:Ha! (1, Troll)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about a year ago | (#44001647)

How's Apple's walled garden any different?

You're asking the wrong Steve.

For a response, please address your query to:

Steve Jobs
c/o Dept of Avarice
666 Infinite Loop (of Suffering)
Lake of Fire, HL 48169

Concept of Ownership (3, Interesting)

Sponge Bath (413667) | about a year ago | (#44001415)

Ownership follows power. If you don't have more brute force strength than the next domestic house ape, you own nothing. Scribbles on a piece of paper like the constitution are not power.

In communist america... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44001437)

company owns you.

Power Corrupts. Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely (4, Insightful)

Zeio (325157) | about a year ago | (#44001449)

This is nothing new.

We live in a oligarchical collectivist police state where a banking cabal, central governments, the military industrial complex and megacorps control everything.

The little guy, the small business, freedom, liberty. Gone.

Welcome to wage slavery, plebeians. And you voted your captors in.

Re:Power Corrupts. Absolute Power Corrupts Absolut (1)

dkleinsc (563838) | about a year ago | (#44001675)

Welcome to wage slavery, plebeians. And you voted your captors in.

Of course they did. If they hadn't, the other bad guys would have gotten in.

Re:Power Corrupts. Absolute Power Corrupts Absolut (2)

mcgrew (92797) | about a year ago | (#44001725)

I've always heard that, but I've never truly believed it. I think the corruptible are drawn to power. Being power hungry must be a form of mental illness; I mean, who in their right mind would want to be President?

Microcomputer revolution was against the "cloud" (4, Insightful)

perpenso (1613749) | about a year ago | (#44001483)

The microcomputer revolution that Woz was a significant contributor to was in part a movement against the "cloud" of that day, remote minicomputers and mainframes where your software and your data lived. One of the goals of the microcomputer revolution was to have your software and your data on your computer on your desk.

If we were to have a second revolution in the spirit of the preceding perhaps we would have our own "cloud" servers hosted on our own IP address at home, offering ubiquitous access to all of our computers and devices and syncing between them. Again, all your data being hosted on your server on your desk (or in the corner or the closet).

Privacy (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44001485)

You send things across the internet and expect privacy? You've got to be kidding. There were no privacy considerations when TCP/IP was designed. Why would you expect bits going through any router or other device that you do not personally control to be private?

Some rules to follow:
1. Don't post anything to Twitter/Facebook/Google+ etc.
2. Even better, don't have accounts.
3. Never send anything to anyone electronically that you don't want on the front page of the newspaper/CNN/Google News etc.
4. When you do post, post as an Anonymous Coward, even if No Such Agency can find out who you are.

Re:Privacy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44001977)

5. Always wear your tinfoil hat.

Ownership in Russia (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44001505)

The difference is that in Russia back then there was nothing to buy... It wasn't just a 'culture of lease', as 3/4 of the population was more worried about eating and having TP, not accepting that their ( unimagined ) digital content was in the ( also unimagined ) cloud.

I do agree that rights were ( still are? ) highly limited there but he needs to compare apples to apples ( sorry...) in making those sorts of general statements.

Digital Communism (1)

SpaceManFlip (2720507) | about a year ago | (#44001527)

It's like the "Electronic Plantation" that Jello Biafra once hollered about

And... (2)

FuzzNugget (2840687) | about a year ago | (#44001553)

He's right.

That there aren't millions of people storming the halls of government with torches and pitchforks is more telling than anything else of how oppressed the USA has become.

Re:And... (3, Interesting)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about a year ago | (#44001681)

He's right.

Of course he is; he's "The Wizard of Woz." ... and I say that as a fairly ardent Apple Hater.

That there aren't millions of people storming the halls of government with torches and pitchforks is more telling than anything else of how oppressed the USA has become.

Well, I can't speak for anyone else, but as "storming the halls of government" would require the resources to make a 2000 mile journey (one way), as well as very likely costing me my source of income, my home, my family... not really feasible.

Now, you coastal folks who can hop on a train and be to DC in a couple hours? YOU have less excuse.

Re:And... (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44001771)

lol yea. A plane ticket is whats stopping you from storming the white house. Continue ranting on forums instead of doing anything positive, worm.

In Soviet Russia... (1)

Phil Urich (841393) | about a year ago | (#44001651)

...everything's pretty familiar, actually. No humorous inversions of American society to be found.

Cloud to butt continues to entertain (1)

neminem (561346) | about a year ago | (#44001665)

"You've got subscriptions and you already said ok, ok, agree and you agree that every right in the world belongs to them and you got no rights and anything you put in my butt, you don't even know,' says Woz. "

watched the entire 4 minutes twice (2, Interesting)

roman_mir (125474) | about a year ago | (#44001749)

I just wanted to see where this was and who was Woz talking with.

Anyway, he is right that the common people don't think about these things, common people don't think about pretty much anything in their lives, they just take things for granted as things happen, they don't think about affecting anything, changing anything.

However Woz is wrong that 'trouble comes from the top', the trouble starts from within. It's exactly the problem with the modern era that 'common people' and (his words) 'high thinkers, intellectuals, philosophers' are given the same vote. That's how the problems start, common people provided with the power to set policy via their majority vote and then they vote for long term destruction of the country by voting for politicians that promise short term gain (stealing from minorities and redistributing) and as freedoms of minorities erode first, eventually government grows big enough to take away everybody's freedoms.

Now, how does this process start precisely, whether it starts at the top that some canning politicians have this long term strategy or maybe canning businessmen that work with canning politicians have this long term strategy... I think it's not even that. I think all such strategies are fairly short term (5-10 years), but it happened periodically in USA that powers were given to government but apparently at first there are enough checks and balances that if a 'right' type of intellectual is found in position of power (a right type of POTUS for example) then this can be reversed.

That's why the current Fed is not the first central bank in USA. But eventually the combination of the exactly wrong (Teddy Roosevelt) POTUS comes to power and the wrong types of ideas (anti-trust laws, then IRS and the Fed) are pushed through.

This quickly corrupts the entire power structure, because it does give government much more power and the apparatus grows very quickly, if it's not killed off at the very beginning, in the first 10 years say, then it's going to be successful and kill the system based on idea of individual freedom.

That progression was clear in USA, from anti-trust laws and beginning of the destruction of private property rights in the case against Standard Oil, to the creation of IRS (initially targeted only top 1-2% for maximum of 7% income) and the Fed (printing money) and then in less than 5 years the Fed is given the power to monetise gov't debt and manipulate interest rates.

That's what it took for USA the last time. Eventually it led to the Fed causing one bubble after another with all the inflation (1921, 1929, 1971, etc). The presidents became bolder and bolder, especially starting with Hoover and FDR, who caused the Great Depression to arise from the recession with all the intervention.

Then the space race and cold war and the related spending, the Medicare and SS to buy more votes, which gave green light to allow prices to start going up because clients were no longer price sensitive. Then all the other departments, from energy to education, again more gov't intervention, subsidies (wars for energy, loan guarantees for education), agriculture of-course, then destruction of real money, shifting the world to fiat currency that allowed massive inflation around the world on an unprecedented scale.

Anyway, there are many chapters here, all leading to bigger and bigger government, more and more 'bread and circuses' mentality with total destruction of self-reliance and initiative, huge increase in feelings of entitlements, more and more obligations shifted to people who still produce. All of this leads to the destruction of productivity and growth of government, as it becomes the biggest economic sector, the biggest employer, the biggest welfare system as well. Every day a number of stories come up how governments want more and more regulations, more and more laws, more and more lawsuits of-course, it seems that this is the status quo of our day and nobody is even noticing the self-destructing trend.

Nobody, until some inconvenient guy, like Snowden, one of the higher level thinkers is presented with the moral dilemma and he takes a step that majority (the mob, the masses) wouldn't. He represents a threat not only to the government, but also to the egos of tens or hundreds of millions of people who maybe for a second see themselves for what they have become and so there are many screams for his head, not only from government officials and MSM but from the every day normal people, the mob.

It's an interesting story and history in front of us and Woz is right, USA is becoming what USSR used to be, it's not fully implemented yet in some aspects, but it's much more than USSR used to be in so many other terrible ways, it's especially clear for people that observed what USSR was from within and what USA has become now.

own the cloud (1)

cosenal (1681306) | about a year ago | (#44001961)

The two main keywords of the news are "own" and "cloud". I wonder why nobody has come up with a combination of the two words, such as *cough* *cough* owncloud :)

USA - USSR + Russian Federation = NWO (4, Insightful)

some old guy (674482) | about a year ago | (#44002003)

The old Party oligarchs in Russia gave up on the disfunctional Marxist police state in favor of an overtly fascist police state so they could 1) become as wealthy as Western oligarchs, 2) flaunt it like Western oligarchs, and 3) give the masses a few more consumer shinies to keep them fairly passive, all with a nice facade of democracy.

Yeltsin set the stage, and Putin has made it a tour de force in how to re-brand oppression. "There is no such thing as a former Chekist", as Uncle Boris likes to say.

Russian has become more like the USA, and the USA becomes more like Russia.

New World Order, anyone?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>