Topics - Renegade [ switch to compact view ]

Pages: prev1 ... 20 21 22 23 24 [25] 26 27 28 29 30 ... 201next
121
An interesting story about a film maker putting his work up for pirates...

http://torrentfreak.com/director-wants-film-pirate-bay-pirates-deliver-140724/

DIRECTOR WANTS HIS FILM ON THE PIRATE BAY, PIRATES DELIVER…

A few days ago a Dutch movie director asked people to upload a copy of one of his older films onto The Pirate Bay. The filmmaker had become fed up with the fact that copyright issues made his work completely unavailable through legal channels. To his surprise, pirates were quick to deliver.

suzyDutch movie director Martin Koolhoven sent out an unusual request on Twitter a few days ago.

While many filmmakers fear The Pirate Bay, Koolhoven asked his followers to upload a copy of his 1999 film “Suzy Q” to the site.

“Can someone just upload Suzy Q to The Pirate Bay?” Koolhoven asked.

The director doesn’t own all copyrights to the movie himself, but grew frustrated by the fact that his film is not available through legal channels.

The TV-film, which also features the film debut of Game of Thrones actress Carice Van Houten, was paid for with public money but after the music rights expired nobody was able to see it anymore.

The main problem is with the film’s music, which includes tracks from popular artists such as The Rolling Stones and Jimi Hendrix. This prevented the film from being released in movie theaters and on DVD, and the TV-network also chose not to extend the licenses for the TV rights.

Since the music was no longer licensed it couldn’t be shown anymore, not even on the websites of the public broadcasters.

“To me, it felt like the movie had died,” Koolhoven tells TorrentFreak.

Hoping to bring it back to life, Koolhoven tweeted his upload request, and it didn’t take long before the pirates delivered. Within a few hours the first copy of the film was uploaded, and several more were added in the days that followed.

“I had no idea the media would pick it up the way they did. That generated more media attention. At first I hesitated because I didn’t want to become the poster boy for the download-movement. All I wanted was for people to be able to see my film,” Koolhoven says.

Unfortunately the first upload of the movie that appeared on The Pirate Bay was in very bad quality. So the director decided to go all the way and upload a better version to YouTube himself.

“I figured it would probably be thrown off after a few days, due to the music rights issue, but at least people could see a half decent version instead of watching the horrible copy that was available on The Pirate Bay,” Koolhoven tells us.

Interestingly, YouTube didn’t remove the film but asked the director whether he had the right to use the songs. Since this is not the case the money made through the advertisements on YouTube will go to the proper rightsholders.

“We’re a few days later now and the movie is still on YouTube. And people have started to put higher quality torrents of Suzy Q on Pirate Bay. Even 720p can be found, I’ve heard,” Koolhoven notes.

While the director is not the exclusive rightsholder, he does see himself as the moral owner of the title. Also, he isn’t shying away from encouraging others to download and share the film.

In essence, he believes that all movies should be available online, as long as it’s commercially viable. It shouldn’t hurt movie theater attendance either, as that remains the main source of income for most films and the best viewing experience.

“I know not everybody cares about that, but I do. The cinema is the best place to see movies. If you haven’t seen ‘Once Upon a Time in the West’ on the big screen, you just haven’t seen it,” Koolhoven says.

In the case of Suzy Q, however, people are free to grab a pirated copy.

“Everyone can go to The Pirate Bay and grab a copy. People are actually not supposed to, but they have my permission to download Susy Q,” Koolhoven said in an interview with Geenstijl.

“If other people download the movie and help with seeding then the download time will be even more reasonable,” Koolhoven adds.

122
I debated putting this in this thread: Interview With "The Dread Pirate Roberts" of The Silk Road, but figured that the issue deserves its own title and thread.

Issue: Can a web site owner be put in prison for something that somebody else posts on the web site owner's site?

Here's an interview with Ross Ulbricht's mother, Lyn Ulbricht.



At the beginning, Alex talks about related issues he's personally encountered (6:00~6:20 contains a tl;dr). Interview starts at about 6:20:

http://youtu.be/W7xkjcTKVfI?t=6m

tl;dr - This fight is about the transfer of intent, e.g. I post something potentially illegal on your site, then you get charged for it. Good discussion there though, and worth a listen.

The interview is very good. Lyn gets to talk a lot about the trial and what is going on. She talks about the underlying issues and some of what they are doing with the lawyers.

Here's the site to free Ross:

http://freeross.org/

Roger Ver has helped the effort incredibly:

https://twitter.com/rogerkver/status/485478065959493632

I posted about that here:

https://www.donationcoder.com/forum/index.php?topic=32392.msg359101#msg359101

Here's an example of a list of URLs that are illegal in Germany. (I've broken the URL so that it doesn't link.)

http : // web . archive . org / web / 20140707204711 / https : // bpjmleak . neocities . org /

Here's a brief quote from that page (no URLs - only commentary - much is highly technical):

In spoiler because it's a bit long - cut to avoid any URLs
Found German secret Internet censorship list as hashes and recovered >99% of the URLs.
tl;dr: Germany has a censorship federal agency called BPjM which maintains a secret list of about 3000 URLs. To keep the list secret it is distributed in the form of md5 or sha1 hashes as the "BPJM-Modul". They think this is safe. This leak explains in detail that it is in fact very easy to extract the hashed censorship list from home routers or child protection software and calculate the cleartext entries. It provides a first analysis of the sometimes absurd entries on such a governmental Internet censorship list.
Introduction to the BPjM

The Federal Department for Media Harmful to Young Persons (German: "Bundesprüfstelle für jugendgefährdende Medien" or BPjM) is an upper-level German federal agency subordinate to the Federal Ministry of Family Affairs, Senior Citizens, Women and Youth. It is responsible for examining media works allegedly harmful to young people and entering these onto an official list – a process known as Indizierung (indexing) in German. The decision to index a work has a variety of legal implications. [...] Germany is the only western democracy with an organization like the BPjM. The rationales for earlier decisions to add works to the index are, in retrospect, incomprehensible reactions to moral panics.
Quote by Wikipedia
The censorship list ("index") is split into various sublists:
Sublist A: Works that are harmful to young people
Sublist B: Works whose distribution is prohibited under the Strafgesetzbuch (German Criminal Code) (in the opinion of the BPjM)
Sublist E: Entries prior to April 1, 2003
Sublist C: All indexed virtual works harmful to young people whose distribution is prohibited under Article 4 of the Jugendmedienschutz-Staatsvertrag
Sublist D: All indexed virtual works, which potentially have content whose distribution is prohibited under the Strafgesetzbuch.
The sublists A, B and E contain about 3000 movies, 400 games, 900 printed works and 400 audio recordings. That sublists are quarterly published in the magazine "BPjM-aktuell" which can be read in any major library in Germany.

The sublists C and D were as well published in BPjS-aktuell (now BPjM-aktuell) up to edition 2003-01.
Since then the list of indexed virtual media is considered secret. As of July 2014 it contains more than 3000 URLs.

In order to make use of a secret censoring list the BPjM offers the "BPjM-Modul", which is a list of cryptographic hashes representing the censored URLs. The list is distributed about once per month to more than 27 companies who offer child protection software or DSL/Cable routers (for example AVM FRITZ!Box Router, Draytek Vigor Router, Telekom Kinderschutz Software, Salfeld Kindersicherung and Cybits JusProg and Surfsitter). This companies usually implement the blocklist as opt-in – users have to enable it by choice to filter the websites. Additionally, the major search engines like Google, Bing or Yahoo agreed to filter their results in Germany based on the list. They can download the (cleartext) list from a server of the FSM (Freiwillige Selbstkontrolle Multimedia-Diensteanbieter e. V.). In comparison to the opt-in approach by the router manufacturers the search engines filter all results served to German users, it is not possible to opt-out.

In 2011, "porno lawyer" Marko Dörre requested access to the list in order to do his work. This was denied two years later in curt decision VG Köln, 2013-07-04 – 13 K 7107/11 stating publication of the list could harm public safety. The curt further justifies its decision by stating that there are agreements with the 27 companies which have access to the hashed blacklist in place to ensure the list stays secret. This methods could be considered safe as there is no unauthorized use of the module data known since its creation in 2005.

This leak proves that the BPjM-Modul is not a secure way to distribute a secret Internet censorship list. It is not difficult at all to extract the list from different sources and calculate the cleartext URLs of the hashes. It proves as well that secret Internet censorship lists are of bad quality, with many outdated and absurd entries harming legitimate businesses.
BPjM-Modul implementations



I wouldn't recommend visiting any of those URLs though. Actually, I would strongly recommend against it.

The URL may have been changed if the Wayback Machine buckles to censorship.

But, if you posted those URLs to a site, you might be endangering the site owner. Or, that's what the issue behind this case is.

Check out http://freeross.org/ for more information on the issue.

This matters.

123
Living Room / Moore's Law Dead by 2022, Expert Says
« on: July 24, 2014, 08:22 AM »
All good things must come to an end?

http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1319330

Moore's Law -- the ability to pack twice as many transistors on the same sliver of silicon every two years -- will come to an end as soon as 2020 at the 7nm node, said a keynoter at the Hot Chips conference here.

While many have predicted the end of Moore's Law, few have done it so passionately or convincingly. The predictions are increasing as lithography advances stall and process technology approaches atomic limits.

"For planning horizons, I pick 2020 as the earliest date we could call it dead," said Robert Colwell, who seeks follow-on technologies as director of the microsystems group at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. "You could talk me into 2022, but whether it will come at 7 or 5nm, it's a big deal," said the engineer who once managed a Pentium-class processor design at Intel.

Moore's Law was a rare exponential growth factor that over 30 years brought speed boosts from 1 MHz to 5 GHz, a 3,500-fold increase. By contrast, the best advances in clever architectures delivered about 50x increases over the same period, he said.

Exponentials always come to an end by the very nature of their unsustainably heady growth. Unfortunately, such rides are rare, Colwell said.

"I don't expect to see another 3,500x increase in electronics -- maybe 50x in the next 30 years," he said. Unfortunately, "I don't think the world's going to give us a lot of extra money for 10 percent [annual] benefit increases," he told an audience of processor designers.

Colwell poured cold water on blind faith that engineers will find another exponential growth curve to replace Moore's Law. "We will make a bunch of incremental tweaks, but you can't fix the loss of an exponential," he said.

DARPA tracks a list of as many as 30 possible alternatives to the CMOS technology that has been the workhorse of Moore's Law. "My personal take is there are two or three promising ones and they are not very promising," he said.

More at the link.

On the plus side, it might make it easier to buy ASICs for cryptocurrency mining in a few years. :)

124
Living Room / iiNET fights data retention down under
« on: July 23, 2014, 12:55 AM »
The iiNET ISP is fighting data retention laws in Australia:

http://blog.iinet.net.au/protecting-your-privacy/

A few excerpts:

One of the features of the iiNet Copyright Trial was our strong stand against monitoring our customers. The Hollywood Studios believed we should data-match information provided by third parties who were monitoring our customers, and then send warning notices to alleged copyright infringers, all without lawful warrants – the High Court agreed with us.

In iiNet’s view, we should not be forced to collect, store or match personal information on behalf of third parties – our only obligation is to retain the information necessary to provide, maintain and bill for services. iiNet does not keep any web browsing history or download records, for example.

Last week the Attorney General, George Brandis said the government is now actively considering a data retention regime that could impact on anyone who uses the Internet in this country.

...

We don’t think this ‘police state’ approach is a good idea, so we’re fighting moves by the Australian Government to introduce legislation that would force us to collect and store your personal information.

...

Police say “If you have nothing to hide, then you shouldn’t be worried”. Personally I think that if you follow that dubious logic, we’d all be walking around naked. It’s not about being worried, or wanting to ‘hide’ anything. It’s about the right to decide what you keep private and what you allow to be shared. YOU should be the one to make that call, and that decision should stick until a warrant or something similar is issued to law enforcement agencies to seize your information.

...

It is hard to measure exactly what this will all cost, but we expect that collecting and keeping every customer’s ‘metadata’ would require the construction of many new data centres, each storing petabytes (that’s 1 billion megabytes!) of information at a cost of tens or hundreds of millions of dollars. There is no suggestion that the government would pay these costs, so our customers will be expected to pick up these costs in the form of a new surveillance tax.

More at the link.

Anyone up for a bet?

In 10 years this will all be looked at with nostalgia as people debate whether or not the government has the right to chip everyone and monitor their movements... Because safety, terrorism, and think of the children!

125
This is darkly funny:

http://arstechnica.com/security/2014/07/google-project-zero-hopes-to-find-zero-day-vulnerabilities-before-the-nsa/

"You should be able to use the Web without fear that a criminal or state-sponsored actor is exploiting software bugs to infect your computer, steal secrets, or monitor your communications," writes Google security researcher Chris Evans. To help make that a reality, Google has put together a new team of researchers whose sole purpose is to find security flaws in software—any software—that's used on the Internet.

Google employees have found and reported security flaws in the past, but only as a part-time effort. The new "Project Zero" team will be dedicated to hunting for the kind of exploitable flaws that could be used to spy on human rights activists or conduct industrial espionage. Aiming to disrupt targeted attacks, the team will look at any software that's depended on by a large number of people.

Project Zero will report bugs it finds only to the software vendor, and it will give those vendors 60 to 90 days to issue patches before public disclosure. This time frame may be reduced for bugs that appear to be actively exploited.

Sounds like they're trying to not be evil! :D

But Google racing against the NSA and GCHQ to find exploits? That's just hilarious!

I guess we should wish them good luck. And hope that they don't have any "accidents"...


Pages: prev1 ... 20 21 22 23 24 [25] 26 27 28 29 30 ... 201next
Go to full version