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!

Red Hat puts out Legislation Alert on the SSSCA

CmdrTaco posted more than 12 years ago | from the get-it-while-you-still-can dept.

Red Hat Software 277

the_2nd_coming writes "Red Hat has announced a legislation alert for the SSSCA. They are collecting comments to hand to lawmakers. Get those comments in while you can, but make sure you give them some thought."

cancel ×

277 comments

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

My Experience With the Linux (-1, Troll)

egg troll (515396) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410588)

I work as a consultant for several fortune 500 companies, and I think I can shed a little light on the climate of the open source community at the moment. I believe that part of the reason that open source based startups are failing left and right is not an issue of marketing as it's commonly believed but more of an issue of the underlying technology.

I know that that's a strong statement to make, but I have evidence to back it up! At one of the major corps(5000+ employees) that I consult for, we wanted to integrate Linux into our server pool. The allure of not having to pay any restrictive licensing fees was too great to ignore. I reccomended the installation of several boxes running the new 2.4.9 kernel, and my hopes were high that it would perform up to snuff with the Windows 2k boxes which were(and still are!) doing an AMAZING job at their respective tasks of serving HTTP requests, DNS, and fileserving.

I consider myself to be very technically inclined having programmed in VB for the last 8 years doing kernel level programming. I don't believe in C programming because contrary to popular belief, VB can go just as low level as C and the newest VB compiler generates code that's every bit as fast. I took it upon myself to configure the system from scratch and even used an optimised version of gcc 3.1 to increase the execution speed of the binaries. I integrated the 3 machines I had configured into the server pool, and I'd have to say the results were less than impressive... We all know that linux isn't even close to being ready for the desktop, but I had heard that it was supposed to perform decently as a "server" based operating system. The 3 machines all went into swap immediately, and it was obvious that they weren't going to be able to handle the load in this "enterprise" environment. After running for less than 24 hours, 2 of them had experienced kernel panics caused by Bind and Apache crashing! Granted, Apache is a volunteer based project written by weekend hackers in their spare time while Microsft's IIS has an actual professional full fledged development team devoted to it. Not to mention the fact that the Linux kernel itself lacks any support for any type of journaled filesystem, memory protection, SMP support, etc, but I thought that since Linux is based on such "old" technology that it would run with some level of stability. After several days of this type of behaviour, we decided to reinstall windows 2k on the boxes to make sure it wasn't a hardware problem that was causing things to go wrong. The machines instantly shaped up and were seamlessly reintegrated into the server pool with just one Win2K machine doing more work than all 3 of the Linux boxes.

Needless to say, I won't be reccomending Linux/FSF to anymore of my clients. I'm dissappointed that they won't be able to leverege the free cost of Linux to their advantage, but in this case I suppose the old adage stands true that, "you get what you pay for." I would have also liked to have access to the source code of the applications that we're running on our mission critical systems; however, from the looks of it, the Microsoft "shared source" program seems to offer all of the same freedoms as the GPL.

As things stand now, I can understand using Linux in academia to compile simple "Hello World" style programs and learn C programming, but I'm afraid that for anything more than a hobby OS, Windows 98/NT/2K are your only choices.

thank you.

Experience with Morally Bankrup Towel Heads ... (-1)

benevolent_spork (446160) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410596)


99 Towel Heads Up On The Wall ...
99 Sheep fucking twits,
You shoot one down,
You kick it around,
98 Rag Heads left on the Wall.

98 Cumlicking Chickenshits on the Wall,
98 Camel sucking penis stuffers,
You shoot one down,
You kick it around,
97 slimy turds left on the wall.

97 Raghead Swine on the wall,
97 Shit Encrusted pukes,
You shoot one down,
You kick it around,
96 flea harbors left on the wall.

96 Moronic idol polishers on the wall,
96 pink skirted sphincter tasters,
You shoot one down,
You kick it around,
95 pillow biters left on the wall.

95 pustuled penis suckers on the wall,
95 festering maggots,
You shoot one down,
You kick it around,
94 brainwashed puddle scum left on the wall.

too funny! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2410611)

"programmed in VB for the last 8 years doing kernel level programming"

so yer the one to blame for BSODs!

Re:My Experience With the Linux (-1)

TrollMan 5000 (454685) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410638)

Mad propz, ET! Here, have some more of the spiked punch.

Re:My Experience With the Linux (-1)

egg troll (515396) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410680)

No worries. Just doing my part to keep the FP away from the homosexual ACs.

Re:My Experience With the Linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2410726)

Just doing my part to keep the FP away from the homosexual ACs.

Wow! You're so brave and macho using an account specifically for trolling. Anyone can do it. I personally can't be arsed, hence AC.

Re:My Experience With the Linux (-1)

egg troll (515396) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410762)

Nope. This is the only account that I use. I don't have a "trolling" account. I post only the truth, and I refuse to give in to Slashdot groupthink soley for the reward of "mod points." Thus I don't feel the need for multiple accounts.

Re:My Experience With the Linux (1)

Wolfier (94144) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410866)

"I post only the truth"

LOL. You call that "truth"? Refusing to give in to Slashdot groupthink does not mean outright typing false and retarded utters off your keyboard.

As much as I hate to say it, you have already given in to the "troll" groupthink. This group is even more bland than the Slashdot group. I feel sorry for your personality, or the lack thereof.

Re:My Experience With the Linux (-1)

cyborg_monkey (150790) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410930)

Do yourself a favor and avoid the "Slashbot Justice League" mentality. Who the fuck are you to criticize, you karma whoring assmunch?

Move along, nothing to see here.

Re:My Experience With the Linux (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2410998)

I post only the truth, and I refuse to give in to Slashdot groupthink soley for the reward of "mod points." Thus I don't feel the need for multiple accounts.


READ: I have nothing interesting to say, I always get modded down, so I post drivel all day.

Re:My Experience With the Linux (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2410657)

Straight out of the 'Troll How-To' top drawer !

Re:My Experience With the Linux (1)

TheRain (67313) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410702)

Whoah whoah whoah... I'm fairly certain you cannot do kernel level programming in VB. Maybe you can use some API's to interact with some kernel dll's or something... but that is hardly low level. But if you've never used anything but basic, you probably don't have a real concept of what low level really is.

Whoa! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2410850)

Whoah whoah whoah... I'm fairly certain you cannot do professional level trolling in VB. Maybe you can use cut and paste to trick some idiot slashbots or something... but that is hardly signal11 level. But if you've never used anything but "*BSD is dying", you probably don't have a real concept of what a real troll really is.

Re:My Experience With the Linux (1)

the_olo (160789) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410857)

Quick! Mod this one up as funny!
Oh my god, have you guys lost all your sense of humour to mod this down as (-1)troll?

Goat ! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2410978)

___.
// \\
(( ''
\\__,
/6 (%)\,
(__/:";,;\--____----_
;; :';,:';`;,';,;';`,`_
;:,;;';';,;':,';';,-Y\
;,;,;';';,;':;';'; Z/
/ ;,';';,;';,;';;'
/ / |';/~~~~~\';;'
( K | | || |
\_\ | | || | valkyrie
\Z | | || |
L_| LL_|
LW/ LLW/

Haha, you didn't expect this, right ?

Re:My Experience With the Linux (2)

chompz (180011) | more than 12 years ago | (#2411020)

were you running on a burned out cpu or ram? That would explain the kernel panics where none have occured before.

Get behind this! (5, Insightful)

Sturm (914) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410600)

We, as a community, really need to get behind this effort. Say what you want about Redhat, but a company is probably going to have louder voice than a few disorganized individuals. Way to go Redhat!

Re:Get behind this! (-1)

benevolent_spork (446160) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410689)

Why you little turd pushing twittle! I know you like someone behind you, preferable nakkid with a pustuled penis sheathed in your crusty anus, but the rest of us are heterosexuals. Take you turd polishing shit encrusted lala dancing cum leaking ass on a long walk in a alligator infested swamp.

Re:Get behind this! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2410721)

Way to go....
How low go you go.

Way to go REDHAT!

Assertion Failed: Yuo!=Fagot (-1)

benevolent_spork (446160) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410743)

Perhaps you are confused. Let me help: I am right, irrevocably and unendingly, and you are a wrong little turd polishing camel fucking unwashed cum drooling penis sheathing fag.

Please rate this post: was this helpful to you?

Re:Assertion Failed: Yuo!=Fagot (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2410846)

The more you say/type the more stupid it
is. Get a life and hide your Windows PC under your desk, your wife is coming..sick kiddie porn watcher.....

1. I AM ALWAYS RIGHT!
2. FOR ALL EXEPTIONS SEE NUMBER ONE!

Thank you!

My Question for the Turd Polisher! (-1)

benevolent_spork (446160) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410864)

What the blazing fuck is an exeption? Is that like after you boyfried reams your crusty ass and you leak green juices?

Re:My Question for the Turd Polisher! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2410897)

Like a said the more you talk, the more intelligent
i become. Make my day and reply on this.

benevolent_spork = bonenvilont_dork

Re:My Question for the Turd Polisher! (-1)

benevolent_spork (446160) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410903)

I remember you said that your day was only made when you had a pustuled shit crusted penis sheathed in your every orifice. Has that happened yet?

Re:Get behind this! (-1)

TrollMan 5000 (454685) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410734)

Take you turd polishing shit encrusted lala dancing cum leaking ass on a long walk in a alligator infested swamp.

He could do that right here in South Florida. And he could catch a little anthraxtoo.

It's a fucked-up place here, y'know!

Re:Get behind this! (1)

wiremind (183772) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410732)

People, this really is very Important!
If you ever really wanted to help make a difference, here is your chance. This bill would change computer technology in such a crippling way we simply can not let this pass. According to this bill the TELNET protocol would be ILLIGAL to use, same with SMTP, any protocol which used plain text transfers would be ILLIGAL under this bill. yes there are easy fixes, such as making encryption wrappers for those protocols, but we should not be FORCED to encrypt our data. thats what SSH and SSL are for.
So go over to the Redhat site, its been slashdotted, so its not going real fast, but go over there, fill out your first name last name email address country and just write a one or 2 line thing saying why you think this is bad.
Dont have anything original ? here:

Dear Senator Fritz Hollings
It is my informed opinion that this bill should not go through. Yes there are good sides to it, such as stopping an extremely large amount of copyright infringments, but at the same time it would cripple the software industry in a very big way.
Thankyou for taking the time to read this.

Yours Truly

------------------
Oh and make sure you select oppose, or strongly oppose, whichever you feel.

Re:Get behind this! (4, Insightful)

NumberSyx (130129) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410845)


Yes there are good sides to it



This is a bad statment. Part of Politics is the art compromise and by giving him this much you are telling him he is on the right track. Remember most of these guys have people filter thier mail for them and sum up issues as "Number For and Number Against" and a statment like this one could be taken as a "Number For". When writting your letters, give them no room for compromise, no room to "Fix" the bill. Tell them the current copyright laws are enough, this bill will only gut Fair Use and should be completely thrown away.

Re:Get behind this! (4, Informative)

tim_maroney (239442) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410901)

According to this bill the TELNET protocol would be ILLIGAL to use, same with SMTP, any protocol which used plain text transfers would be ILLIGAL:...

Not even remotely true. First off, try the very second paragraph:
Subsection (a) does not apply to the offer for sale or provision of, or other trafficking in, any previously-owned interactive digital device, if such device was legally manufactured or imported, and sold, prior to the effective date of regulations adopted under section 104 and not subsequently modified in violation of (a) or 103(a).

In addition, this bill only applies when private sector representatives have achieved consensus on a security standard for a particular technology. Can you imagine that the Internet standard bodies would create standards that ban all the previous standards on which the Internet is founded and by which it runs?

It's not a good bill, but let's not lie about what it actually is. Sheesh. I mean, the first time this bill was mentioned here, some geek at a Linux zine was claiming it banned all open source software.

Tim

Re:Get behind this! (2)

the_2nd_coming (444906) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410939)

It's not a good bill, but let's not lie about what it actually is. Sheesh. I mean, the first time this bill was mentioned here, some geek at a Linux zine was claiming it banned all open source software.

yes it will. Open source software can not be controlled the way a closed source programs can be. it will be seen as a circumvention tool and be outlawed implicitly by some crafty federal district attorney who convinces some judge.

Stupid rhetorics (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2410617)

Goddamn that guy.

"We're going to shine the light of justice..."

"...draw the line in the sand against the evil ones..."

"Our work is against Evil"

Who's he talking to? The IQ 85 population?

Videotapes are digital? (4, Insightful)

Red Aardvark House (523181) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410620)

From the Redhat article:

Essentially, all devices and software that fall into this vague definition of digital interactive technology will have to include encryption so it can't be copied. This could include VCR tapes, compact discs, and the devices that run them, as well as computers and open source software.

Surprises me. This is one of the most heavy-handed pieces of legislation I've seen. I can understand the digital aspect of it, but even encrypting videotapes, the last bastion of small-scale piracy? I'm really not for piracy, but I thought the videotape issue fell under "don't sweat the small stuff".

Gotta give credit for the thoroughness of the proposed legislation, though.

Re:Videotapes are digital? (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2410652)

Your post was not annoying enough. Could you please repost after you add more slashdot cliches such as: "the next Big Thing TM", "free as in beer", "release early, release often". You only had one in your post! Rectify yourself.

Re:Videotapes are digital? (-1)

TrollMan 5000 (454685) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410678)

If you got something useful to say, then say it! Otherwise please shut the fuck up!

Fuckwad AC.

Re:Videotapes are digital? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2410704)

If you got something useful to say, then say it! Otherwise please shut the fuck up!

Fuckwad AC.


If you got something useful to say, then say it! Otherwise please shut the fuck up!

Fuckwad Troll.

Fuckwad Troll. (-1)

TrollMan 5000 (454685) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410757)

And damn proud of it, too.

Thank you! It was the nicest thing said to me here in a long time.

You really made my day.

Re:Videotapes are digital? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2410819)

Senator Hollings has a history of this kind of legislation, lets hope he retires or gets defeated.

Emperor Norton asks for peace, gets it! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2410916)

" One night a gang of vigilantes gathered for a pogrom against San Francisco's Chinatown. All that stood in their way was the solitary figure of Norton. A sane man would not have been there in the first place. A rational man would have tried to reason with them. A moralist would have scolded them. A man as daft as Norton usually seemed would have loudly ordered them to cease and desist in the name of His Royal Imperial authority. All such tacks would probably have been futile, and Norton resorted to none of them. He simply bowed His head in silent prayer. The vigilantes dispersed."

Everybody understands Mickey Mouse,
Few people understand Herman Hesse,
and nobody understands Emperor Norton.

Truly a man of peace, we need more people like him now. How many of you have the titanic nads to do what Emperor Norton did -- and succeed?


To learn more about Emperor Norton [westnet.com] and rot your brain with more Discordian proaganda, see here [westnet.com] .

In the Name of Trolligula (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2410639)

The Register is reporting that being a flaming homosexual is now an official religion in the Slashdot authors community after the 2001 census conducted earlier this year. The final number of 'Anal Terrorists' has not been confirmed yet as only about 95% of the census forms have been returned. As you could probably imagine, VA Linux is none too pleased. Apparently though, you can't get fined for ramming your man root into the Ass Crevice of your local Slashdot author." Actually, according to the story, this gives the Ass Pirate much more official status than heterosexuality would have if everyone put that down.

Msg me on aim, sn is johnpaulx86

I'm killing gnomes! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2410642)

I'm killing gnomes! Poking them to death and collecting their corpses! Yeah!

Re:I'm killing gnomes! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2410650)

What're you going to do with them corpses?

Something truly horrible, I hope.

Re:I'm killing gnomes! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2410827)

I hope to sell the corpses. Where can I sell them?

No need to kill Gnome! (-1)

egg troll (515396) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410785)

Don't bother yourself with trying to kill Gnome. KDE will take care of that. Gnome's C++-based sluggishness will eventually be its fatal downfall. Superior Window Managers [apple.com] will triumph!!

Re:No need to kill Gnome! (-1)

TrollMan 5000 (454685) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410794)

And BSD is already dead.

Re:No need to kill Gnome! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2410868)

Who is this KDE and why is he killing my gnomes? Personally, I find my "poke 'em to death" method to be quite adequate. Fuck this KDE guy!

Re:No need to kill Gnome! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2410912)

at least get your trolling right. gnome is based on regular C

Justification for Legislation? (4, Interesting)

debest (471937) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410645)

I seem to recall that the DMCA was "justified" because it was written to be compliant with the WIPO / WTO treaties that the U.S. signed.

Does anyone know if these international treaties proposed anything like the restrictions called for in the SSSCA?

Re:Justification for Legislation? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2410826)

goat!

U.S. legislation would outlaw open source software (5, Insightful)

Spootnik (518145) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410653)

But there is absolutely no way the "industry committee" will approve as "secure" any operating system where you could just reconfigure the kernel to remove the DRM feature. They would never, ever do such a thing--because they're the "industry committee."

The amazing thing to me is that Senate will be openly considering legislation to put a committee of corporations in charge of deciding which hardware and OS configurations will be legal and illegal. Even if the committee somehow miraculously doesn't ban Open Source operating systems, the thought that they might be handed the power of life and death over operating systems is startling.

I think it's wildly unrealistic to assume SSSCA won't pass just because it's obviously crazy legislation. There are a lot of crazy laws on the books, and most geeks didn't take DMCA very seriously either until Dmitry got busted. Don't be complacent.

Re:U.S. legislation would outlaw open source softw (3, Insightful)

squaretorus (459130) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410746)

Senate will be openly considering legislation to put a committee of corporations in charge of deciding which hardware and OS configurations will be legal and illegal

This, if it happens, will be a step FAR too far. While we can't trust the legislators to get this right because they simply dont understand it, we sure as hell can't trust companies with it.

Every Company Rule #1 Exploit each and every opportunity presented to you to make money.
Every Company Rule #2 see Rule 1

Of course, if it was left to /.ers to handle computer laws would we be any better off? Seriously! Would we??

Shh! Don't tell them we can modify open software! (4, Funny)

SanLouBlues (245548) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410820)

I can see it now. In the code:

#IFDEF INANE_COPY_PROTECTION
#include RIAA_Headers.h)
#ENDIF

And in the documentation:
b) Please do not define INANE_COPY_PROTECTION. It is very bad.

i'm very pessemistic about this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2410666)

this law has corporate america written all over it. and in a country where the government whores itself to the highest bidder, what big money wants, big money gets.

sad but true

NASDAQ puts out de-listing alert for VA Linux (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2410668)

'Cause LNUX dropped below a dollar again today. Eric Raymond: "Surprised by Chapter 11?"

Re:NASDAQ puts out de-listing alert for VA Linux (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2410727)

NASDAQ has relaxed the one dollar limit, recently.

De-listing is not imminent.

Re:NASDAQ puts out de-listing alert for VA Linux (-1)

Juan Epstein (238683) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410754)

"Would you like fries with that?" -Richard Stallman, 2002

Impact of law on non US citizens (3, Interesting)

Diabolical (2110) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410694)

I have contemplated for a time.. trying to figure out what the implications of laws like this would have for non-US citizens. Currently lot's of software/code stems from US based people.

Can someone please enlighten me as to what this law and others like it would mean for me in the Netherlands?

I would be happy to join your (and mine btw) cause but since i am not represented in the US in any way i can't do alot of things i'm afraid.

Re:Impact of law on non US citizens (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2410770)

Leave your shitty little bitty junkie country
and move to the free world of the USA!

Thats all you need to know, bushtucker grass
smoking cheese turd!

Re:Impact of law on non US citizens (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2410941)

Next time make the sarcasm more apparent, people are not getting it.

I know you don't really mean it :)

Greets from the Netherlands.

Re:Impact of law on non US citizens (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2410813)

Suppose this law went through with the standard interperatation and viewpoint here, i.e. Open-Source is illegal.

Now, the percentage may be shrinking, but a significant group of hackers (including top people like Linus, RMS and Larry Wall) live in the U.S. They'll be given a simple, inquisition-style choice: stop coding, leave the country, or rot in jail for the rest of your life. Options A and C would deprive everyone (even in the Netherlands) of the benefits of their future work, and would throw their projects into leaderlessness (yeah, they'll mostly recover, but how soon? and not as strong). Option B would suddenly push on htem the rather large task of moving to another country. You can't do much coding when you're trying to learn the language/geography/culture of your new home (and even less if your computer is packed in a box!).

So the entire community will loose the work of those misfortunate enough to live in the U.S., possibly orphaning entire projects. That's the immediate risk for Dutch people.

Re:Impact of law on non US citizens (1)

Peter Harris (98662) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410848)

Well, for a start there will be more software jobs outside the US :-)

But if you work on any software or hardware that gets around the state-mandated usage-restrictions, don't plan any trips to California, eh?

Oh, and hardware will probably get more expensive because of the demand for unrestricted sound cards etc.

There might be a good side - if Windows starts refusing to run on the 'illegal' hardware, then it might just be the last push needed to make some users switch to a better OS.

Re:Impact of law on non US citizens (1)

ThePilgrim (456341) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410893)

Thgis is true. I'm in the UK and would like to know what i could do to stop this.

Freedom of Encryption (0)

TheLOTR (526987) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410703)

Isn't there someway to argue that encryption in the '00s is as important to personal freedom as firearms in the 1800's? Firearms are protected in the Bill of Rights because in our forefather's time they were thought necessary to ensure against the tyranny of our own government. Doesn't encryption fulfill a similar role nowadays? Just a thought, and a controversial one I'm sure...I'm not exactly sure I'd want to be comparing encryption to firearms to some people I know, but I think that there is a similarity in them (to a point of course :)

The US will be the Tech Getto of the world if... (2, Informative)

iplayfast (166447) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410710)

if this bill succeeds. I'm a Canadian so my comments to the senetor would mean less then zero. But consider all the new development that happens in the US. Then consider what the bill would force as an additional development that must happen for the software/hardware to be released. This alone would cause the cost of development to increase, (and thus reduce the amount of development done). Not to mention the obvious First Ammendment abuse.

slashdoted (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2410725)

Server appears to be slashdotted.

Everyone step back, take a deep breath and then try again.

Don't fall for the illusion of doing something. (4, Insightful)

dave-fu (86011) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410729)

Don't write a bit player in the software world (no offense to RedHat, but they're far from what I think of when I hear the term "multinational" bandied about), write your goddamned representatives and senators letters. Make sure your home address is on it, and make sure that you make the disdain for how the bill will treat you obvious without resorting to f bombs and the like.

Something else to try... (-1)

egg troll (515396) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410801)

I find tricking your Congressman into viewing a link to, say, Rotten.com's FECAL JAPAN is also a good way to make your point.

Penis. (-1)

Dead Penis Bird (524912) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410971)

Greetings egg_troll.

I prefer Rotten.com's PENIS BIRD. Please see my URL for more information.

Re:Don't fall for the illusion of doing something. (1)

BluePenguin (521713) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410803)

Don't write a bit player in the software world (no offense to RedHat, but they're far from what I think of when I hear the term "multinational" bandied about), write your goddamned representatives and senators letters

While I agree that Red Hat may not have the clout to sway the Senate... they do have the name recognition to get other players involved.

Think about it... How many people have you heard say they just installed Linux (current Redhat version number). There are plenty of people who don't know much about opensource, but Redhat == Linux to them... And other news agencies pay attention to Redhat because of that.

I'll agree though that simply contributing to the Redhat effort isn't enough...but having Redhat on board for this will certainly help the casue. And you can always write your Senator in addition to this!

:q!

Re:Don't fall for the illusion of doing something. (1)

friedmud (512466) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410979)

I wrote (actually e-mailed through here [congress.org] ) my senators and representatives when this was first posted on /.

I got personal replies from all of them! It took about 2 weeks to get replies back from all of them but they all did. One of them said that he was vaguely aware of the situation and that he was glad to hear from his constituents on the issue.

It does work people! Do it! It will make a difference!

Here is what I wrote:

/////////////////
Senator Bond,

Being one of your constituents (I live in Sometown, MO) - I felt it my duty to inform you that we are not happy about the new Security Systems Standards and Certification Act (SSSCA) that is currently in draft form and is being spearheaded by Senator Fritz Hollings from South Carolina.

I know that in the wake of last week's tragedy - a more secure computing model sounds like a good idea. But let me assure you that this bill is not the way to go about implementing it. This bill has the potential to ruin computing as we know it. It will squash innovation and many freedoms.

You can check this address for one of the many news stories about this bill:
http://www.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=01/09/20/2 047211

Please do not endorse this bill - as someone who is in your voting district I will be watching very carefully to see who is supporting this bill, and let me assure you that my next vote will be influenced by what I see.

Sincerely,
My Name
//////////////

Fried

SSSCA Loophole (4, Interesting)

Apreche (239272) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410733)

Just as with the DMCA DCSS loopholes of turning the code into a prime number, and making songs out of the source code, there is a loophole in the SSSCA as well. If you previously owned non-secure electronic equipment then it's ok. Oh, look plextor has to re-design all of their plexwriters, I wonder what will happen to the old ones? ^_^
The big problem with the SSSCA is that newer faster computers will have to have built in security against copyright infringement, and it is illegal to break that security. It is also illegal to remove security stuffs from a copyrighted file, like one of those secure windows ones. What do we do about this? We write a java program that goes into your system and cracks all the security. Then we have it run off an obscure web server in another country. Visit website, java runs. You didn't do it. You thought the site was something else. It doesn't say anything about files that originally had no security. The SSSCA is all about making new stuff illegal, not already existing stuff. So you change the dates on all your files.

The real reason the government gets away with stuff like this is because we /.ers are the only people who understand what's going on, and pay attention to it. We have to bring this to the attention of the general public. Tell people that mp3s wont play correctly on a new computer with windowsxp. And that if this law is passed it will be illegal to download winamp. See what happens.

Yeah so buy up a bunch of hardware and download software now, that way it wont be illegal.

johnpaulx86 (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2410752)

A talking point (2)

swm (171547) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410759)

The last time the federal government got seriously involved in software development, it tried to write an air-traffic control system.

The project was written off as a dead loss after spending something like 5 years and $9B (Maybe someone can supply the exact figures; too many zeros makes me dizzy...)

Do they think that they can do any better designing OS APIs and security systems?

- SWM

Re:A talking point (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2410886)

The problem here was not that it was a govt project per say, but that the FAA is the most corrupt agency to deal with in terms of any contract and bid issues.

While many contract officers in many other govt agencies are often both very dilligent and very ethical in what they do, follow the FAR religiously, and provide open bidding to third parties, none of these things happen with the FAA, and for this reason honerable companies refuse to submit bids to them. This problem is so severe that they choose to revoke the FAR and procurement policy entirely recently. I think they just didn't like the oversight offered by competitive bidding when they wished to greese palms there.

What is unconsinable is that these dirty contract officers have let vendors supply defective and poor products and, as a result, have had numerous outages that have jepordized peoples lives.

One particular conversation I recall with one of these ignorant FAA contract officer bozos was how he was bragging how he had his wife set up as a 8H firm, which generally get special consideration (woman/minority owned businesses), and how he could then approve her bids. This was one of the few times I actually wished I tape recorded conversations...

Don't blame this on govt in general, blame it where it belongs, on the shoulders of those individuals who have personally failed in their duties in a criminally negligent manner.

Re:A talking point (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2410935)

Try telling that to the DOJ folks in the case against Microsoft.

A new T-shirt ? (2)

AftanGustur (7715) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410818)


Will the hottest T-shirt at thinkgeek.com [thinkgeek.com] in 2003 be "Legalize Linux" ?

Re:A new T-shirt ? (1)

arkanes (521690) | more than 12 years ago | (#2411004)

Or "Hacking is not a crime"

The Impact On The American Economy (4, Insightful)

Rosonowski (250492) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410822)

The truth is, here, as I've been preaching to those at my school, this law will have many impacts that will be quickly felt. Aside from the obvious intent of making it illegal to burn a CD, and other such things, which do fall under fair use I might add, It will have a great deal of financial impact.


Open source software is run on a great deal of the smaller and even the larger buisnesses in this nation. It is generally more stable, and easier to apply. Larger companys favor the *nix frame, as they are often familar with it, so no further training is needed in many cases. For smaller company, the thousand dollar plus (per machine) liscencing fees for other software can be overwhelming.


Many buisnesses will die, if unable to use this free or low cost software.


And there are other implications to this LAW.

Implications that, when I gave copys of the law to my sociolgy class, bursts of laughter were heard to erupt.


And the basis of the laws....

Section 109, Definitions, defines an 'Interactive Computer Service' Under a law passed in 1934!


And section 104 is laughable as well. 'Antitrust Exemption?'


Although there is minor solace, even if this law was passed. It's unconsititutional.


The fourth Ammendment protects against Search And Seizure without reasonable cause. To enact the use of software which would monitor my activitys is illegal, according to rulings which deem that any method of surveillance (such as thermal imaging) that could find information that could not be otherwise obtained warrantless, is invalid.


You could not otherwise find this information without physichal acsess to my computer.


Therefore, it is in violation of the fourth ammendment.

Re:The Impact On The American Economy (1)

Telecommando (513768) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410895)

Therefore, it is in violation of the fourth ammendment.

And your point is?

Seriously, laws passed in the so-called "war on drugs" allow seizure of assets without due process and the judges in this country uphold them time and time again. Don't think they won't uphold this law as well. We don't have a "justice" system in the US, we have a "legal" system. A justice system implies that at some point justice is done, a legal system only implies that the laws are enforced.

Re:The Impact On The American Economy (2)

ZaMoose (24734) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410969)

What's to prevent an allout assault on what we consider "warrants"?

<sarcasm>We all know that technology faces us with greater challenges to law enforcement, so we must come up with better, more intrusive, errr, more focused laws to combat these new forms of "terrorism". In fact, if you violate a clause of a software license, you are comitting economic terrorism against its owners and can face life in prison!</sarcasm>

What if the FBI decides that "pervasive surveillance warrants" are a necessity and each and every Compaq that hits the shelves has a warrant attached to it? Sheesh.

The scary thing is I can see Hollings, et. al making political hay off such statements

Let Freedom Ring (2, Interesting)

W.B. Yeats (236617) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410824)

I am against anything that will reduce my ability to use Open Source software. I can't afford to buy Microsoft products -- and I won't pirate them. I hope my government can understand that there are lots of people like me -- I mean, I don't go to movies, I don't rent movies -- I don't want and can't afford that culture. All I want to be able to do is participate in a community of software users and developers who share their work -- I don't want to topple Microsoft or upset the movie and recording industries or anything like that.

Think about the original New England Colonists -- they didn't want to destroy England or infringe on England's ability to do business or impose any beliefs or behaviors on England. The result of their cooperation and independence is the greatest country on the face of the Earth -- and the most vital democracy in the history of human civilization. Just think -- maybe Open Source software can be a new chapter in the continuation of the unfolding story of democracy that is the United States of America.

Re:Let Freedom Ring (0, Flamebait)

talonyx (125221) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410951)

It's paragraphs like that the rest of the world hates, don't you understand?

We're all sick and fucking tired of hearing about
America the Proud Last bastion of Freedom, when in reality 90% of you Yanks are fat redneck slobs that can't tell a computer from a dishwasher and don't want to.

Sure, the other 10% of you do a decent job making up for the slackers, but please try to realize how the world views you. We don't love america. We probably never will. America seems content to legislate everybody into little boxes and put padlocks on them.

Sure makes me fucking angry to be a puppet Canadian.

Re:Let Freedom Ring (2)

tim_maroney (239442) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410982)

I am against anything that will reduce my ability to use Open Source software.

What makes you think this will do that? I have yet to see any plausible scenario for a broad ban on open source, which would be a prima facie violation of the First Amendment.

You might wind up having to use a closed-source program for multimedia playback at worst. Maybe that's bad, but if so, focus on that, not on grandiose fantasies about shadowy agencies making it illegal to write and give away any and all software. Absurd claims about standards bodies making all open source software illegal are not worth the unsecured bits they're magnetized on.

I think people have a hard time acknowledging that what they're really having a problem with is laws against software specifically designed to crack security (e.g., DeCSS, Sklyarov) or violate copyright (e.g., Napster). That's not as sexy a cause as grand and ambiguous claims about freedom in the abstract. It may be a just cause, but let's call it what it is.

Tim

Re:Let Freedom Ring (1)

CoffeeJedi (90936) | more than 12 years ago | (#2411023)

I mean, I don't go to movies, I don't rent movies -- I don't want and can't afford that culture

you can't afford the what, 3 bucks to rent a movie? all talk of the SSSCA aside, that's pretty sad dude (or pretty exagerated)

HBO + TiVo = Jail ?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2410832)

Sec 103 (b) : PERSONAL TIME-SHIFTING COPIES CANNOT BE BLOCKED. -- No person may apply a security measure that uses a certified security technology to prevent a lawful recipient from making a personal copy for time-shifting purposes of programming at the time it is lawfully performed, on an over-the-air broadcast, non-premium cable channel, or non-premium satellite channel, by a television broadcast station (as defined in section 122(j)(5)(A) of title 17, United States Code), a cable system (as defined in section 111(f) of such title), or a satellite carrier (as defined in section 119(d)(6) of such title.)

OK, IANAL, but why does this differentiate non-premium cable channel from premium? Pirating does not seem to be the essence of this article, since that is taken care of by the "lawfully performed" clause. This seems to open the door to make time-shifting premium channels illegal.

Thoughts?

What RedHat has that we don't (3, Interesting)

TedCheshireAcad (311748) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410860)

By taking this initiative, RedHat has brought some corporate muscle behind the fight of the SSSCA. Before now, it is all private citizens writing letters to their representatives, but now that there is a major corporate backer, the anti-SSSCA movement will go further, and more representatives will pay attention to it. As a corporation, RedHat can also provide some solid technical reference, details that a Congressman or Congresswoman would be able to better understand, and be more likely to pay attention to than what Joe Linux User says about copyright protection technology.

Vive the government (1)

WildBeast (189336) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410882)

Looks like Linux and Windows are threatened by the government. Soon enough we won't be able to use any of those OS's freely. Anyway that'll teach you to have double standards. Linux users are happy when MS get slapped by the government and Windows users are happy when Linux get slapped by the government. You digged your own graves. Instead of coming together and fighting the crazy laws, nah.

I wasn't going to comment but... (5, Insightful)

Outlyer (1767) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410887)

I wasn't going to comment, but I just loved this one line:

  • The bill is being motivated by motion picture and television studios that seek to end piracy of their movies and other forms of entertainment. Curiously, these studios also happen to be among Hollings' top campaign contributors, as noted by Newsforge reporter Dan Berkes.

(Emphasis mine)

"Curiously" is an understatement. Apparently in America you can buy anything.

On a related note, does anyone find it strange the commiting a crime against a corporation is worse that a crime against another individual?

Violate the DMCA - 25 Years w/o parole

Kill someone - 20 Years, parole after 6-8

You can buy anything? (2, Funny)

Haeleth (414428) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410952)

"The price of freedom is $1bn every four years."
(attr. G. W. Bush)

Not one instance... (2)

rodentia (102779) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410892)

of the phrase fair use anywhere in this legislation. One mention of *time-shifting* which apparently covers all conceivable aspects of fair use of digitized data. The idiocy of this bill beggars description.

This is the flavor we get from the small-government, get-the-Fed-out conservatives. A boycott of any devices/systems implementing any aspect of such a system is a moral imperative.

Wanna see this thing thrown out? (1)

crimoid (27373) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410898)


If SMTP will go away (as we know it) they just tell the American people "E-Mail will go away" and you better believe that this thing won't get approved. Done Deal.

A way to get power to listen (1)

strudeau (96760) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410905)

I agree that it is important for all of us in the Slashdot/Open Source/Free Software etc. communities to oppose wrong-headed bills like this one and the DMCA. It is imperative that we continually develop our collective power by lobbying individually (ie letters, phone calls, etc) and collectively (via various professional associations, companies and organizations) to put an end to Bad legislation and promote Good legislation at the same time. But, as we have been learning, our power in Washington so far does not come close to matching the power of the entertainment and other industries because they have more of one thing that we can never match: money.


I propose that if that this law passes and legal/legislative actions continue to be fruitless in challenging the DMCA and other Bad legislation we learn from past social movements -- from our own countries' revolution to very recent history. Let's not forget the power of civil disobedience. If Congress passes a law that is so clearly wrong, let's ignore it -- refuse to cooperate. They can't arrest all of us -- and if they did, who would be the stewards of the information economy? There are seeds of this in the creative distribution of DeCSS code.


If Open Source software is outlawed, only outlaws will have Open Source software.


---

Direct action gets the goods. -- Mother Jones

Why would anyone think this is a good idea? (5, Interesting)

mttlg (174815) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410913)

Okay, so the idea here is to make every possible data storage device and the associated software play nice with copyright. The benefits are:
  • Copyright infringement in the original digital form is theoretically impossible.
  • Content providers, software manufacturers, etc. can sleep well knowing that their profits are secure, as long as people keep buying their products.

And some of the problems are:

  • Copyright "theoretically" expires, but protection methods don't.
  • Fair Use will be outlawed through technology.
  • Infringement will just require an analog capture method or good old reverse engineering (which of course is already illegal in some cases, even though it isn't...).
  • Hardware and software will be more expensive/less useful and there will be less to choose from, resulting in slower sales of new products and a surge in the used equipment market.
  • Content will be less useful, and therefore will have less value, meaning lower sales if prices do not fall considerably to compensate (take a look at the sales of e-books).
  • Updates must be made mandatory to prevent vulnerabilities from being exploited once they are discovered, meaning that the government must have access to your computer for this to work.
  • The feeling of the government trying to regulate or control every aspect of our lives will increase dramatically, adding fuel to the anti-government sentiment that has temporarily faded in the past month.
  • The acronym "SSSCA" doesn't even have the warm and fuzzy feel to it that "DMCA" does.

So why would someone support this?

  • Ignorance
  • Stupidity
  • Bribes
  • Greed
  • Totalitarianism
  • A general desire to screw people over

Am I missing something here, or could this show us what our lawmakers really think of the people they represent (assuming that they actually record the votes this time...)? We've seen much of this before, but this time they aren't even trying to make it look good.

Shades of Gibson (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2410919)

This is like Neuromancer. Underground SW and HW. Illegal OSes. I am more furious than I have ever been in my life. Our "representatives" are using our lives, our rights, our freedom as their political currency and with a very low exchange rate to boot. They deserve to be punished in meatspace but hell, let's kick their butts in the electronic world before we resort to meatspace insurgency.

Politics for Sale - Cheaper in SC? (2)

laetus (45131) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410924)

I took note that some of Hollings biggest contributors are the media giants.

Curious though, that they choose a South Carolina senator to sponsor it for them.

Which makes me wonder, is it just that Hollings was an easy buy or cheaper due to the lower standard of living in SC?

Inquiring minds want to know.

It's the market, stupid (2, Insightful)

kingpin2k (523489) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410942)

So, record companies and movie studios don't want you to pirate their product. That's fine with me. They have some options. 1) Stop making them: fairly self-explanatory...no movies, no piracy. 2) Make them affordable: Let's face it...I'd rather pay a few dollars to see a quality movie in a theater than watch a grainy VCD that took me five hours to download. $8 per ticket plus $5 popcorn and a $4 coke doesn't cut it, though. 3) Buy the US Congress: this is our weak point...535 guys who have no clue regarding technology or anything digital can easily be swayed by legal tender. I really can't blame the industry for taking advantage of a system that gives the federal government so much power. It's our own faults for electing these morons. It doesn't make them right, only understandable.

Contact your senators... (2, Informative)

RadioheadKid (461411) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410947)

Contact your senators [senate.gov] . It's easy, if you don't know what to say, just be polite and paraphrase some lines from the Red Hat press release. Tell him/her how the bill could directly have an effect on your life, and maybe an example of how it could effect the Senator's life too. All the webpages have web forms to send emails, so type something up first, run spell check and then paste it in the form. It couldn't be easier. On more thing, make sure you put your real name and address, if it's coming from a real person, it has a better chance of being heard.

KidA

This will stop the terrorists for sure... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2410964)

From the RedHat article:
"This could include VCR tapes, compact discs, and the devices that run them.."

Terrorists destroy the World Trade Center, killing over 5,000. In response, Democrat and Senator Fritz Hollings introduces a bill mandating government-specified encryption standards to prevent the pirating of copyrighted material.

Exactly how will this prevent terrorism ? Are we in imminent danger of Ossama bin Rotten pirating last week's episode of 'Fraser', and if he did, how many lives would be at stake ?

The answer is that the proposed legislation has nothing to do with national security. The nation has suffered horrific tragedy. We are now war, fighting to bring those reponsible for the deaths of thousands to justice. Copyright violiation is not, at this time, the issue at the front of our minds.

Senator Hollings is taking advantage of tragedy to sneak through legislation depriving individuals and companies of an essential freedom. He exploits deaths of thousands to push the political agenda of his financial backers at an opportune moment. This is one of the ethically sickest acts in the history of American politics.

To encrypt or not to encrypt (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#2410965)

That is the question
I was just thinking about something. Couldn't copyright encryption schemes be used by terrorists. Aren't the new laws going to try to limit the amount of encryption used in systems. If you think there is no connection between crypto laws and copyright just think about how the DVD mess happened. The DVD drives had a 40 bit encryption system. Remember 40-bits is the export encryption limit. This is so the CIA and NSA and others can brute force decrypt foreign systems in no time. At least that was the thinking. Never mind these countries might be smart enough to come up with there own really good encryption systems. Anyway getting back on track it seems to me that if this SSSCA get through by some miracle then there may be a mandatory encryption system but it may be a really lame one with a 40-bit key. That is unless the SSSCA wants to make the sale of computers from HP, IBM, Apple, Dell and everyone else to foreign countries to be illegal. It just strikes me how contradictory and confused the governments policies are when it comes to encryption. "Uh encryption is bad, yeah bad, except for the RIAA and MPAA then its good yeah we meant good for them bad for you"

even surfing the current web is gonna be illegal? (1)

humps (245087) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410976)

So, 'interactive digital devices'....
ya browser doesn't stop you from right click and save an image (copy righted material) and most likely its not SSL'ed (no encryption), its gonna be illegal!

I like those smart people, love to study their brain.

humps

What I did: (2)

Soko (17987) | more than 12 years ago | (#2410977)

To: pressrm@us.ibm.com


From: Ron Sokoloski

Dear IBM:

As a leading proponent of Open Source software, I urge you to take a strong stance against the "Security Systems Standards and Certification Act" as it is currenlty proposed by Senator Fritz Hollings (Dem.-S.Carolina), Chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee. Background information may be found by following these links:

http://www.redhat.com/opensourcenow/article2.htm l

http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,46655, 00 .html

http://cryptome.org/sssca.htm

http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/10/1452 21 7&mode=thread

This bill goes much too far and may actually make Open Source Software such as Linux illegal, since the source code for such software is readily available and easily modifyable. Even though I am Canadian, this bill affects me, since American based firms such as IBM and RedHat will be forced to close parts of thier source code effectievly nullifying the GPL or to cease use and development of the Linux Operating System.
Please be a leader in opposing the terms of this bill that would threaten our freedom to choose.

Regards,

Ron Sokoloski


I figure soften 'em up with the heavy artilery right away.

Soko

What happens to non-profits, local and state govt? (1)

Linuxathome (242573) | more than 12 years ago | (#2411007)

The number of reports of non-profit organizations, local/city governments and state governments starting to use open-source alternatives was growing--I'd always hear/read about so-and-so agency switching. Now, if the SSSCA was enacted, I don't see an alternative for these organizations to use anything else but commercial software when it comes time for them to upgrade/change. The costly consequences of this are endless.
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>