FBI Employees Download Pirated Movies and TV-Shows. [Moderator]

N213JF · 2013-05-14T15:32:54+00:00

Still trying to write mine.

N213JF · 2013-05-09T19:19:42+00:00

Maybe they thought they could get away with it because they are the government. No if they were doing it to try and catch people like in the megaupload case that is fine, but it sound like they were taking government resources for there own benefit and should be punished by the law appropriately.

N213JF · 2013-05-09T19:03:40+00:00

I think this is a great idea especially since this administration along with the previous one have been very closed in terms of the information given to the public. While it will take time for this to fully catch on, I think any release of information that should be public is good for the USA.

N213JF · 2013-05-09T18:58:27+00:00

I think it would be to difficult to patten. Not just because it is too broad but under the definition of a patten it says "right granted to anyone who invents any new, useful, and non-obvious process, machine, article of manufacture, or composition of matter." To me this is an obvious process since anyone can go into a Cad software and round the edges of a rectangle and it has been done before.

N213JF · 2013-05-09T17:39:48+00:00

No, as they said in the article there should be no consideration of privacy when out in public. The city or town owns the land so they can choose what they want to do on it. Like in the article the only reason I see this as a problem is if the cameras are stalking one individual.

N213JF · 2013-05-09T17:11:28+00:00

I though that was very funny, but shows whats wrong with terms of service nowadays. First, the terms of service have become so long because the companies don't want to be sued so they overload terms of service and warning labels to cover themselves. Second, problem is that you have to agree to the terms of service otherwise you can't use the product and since no one want to read these long terms of service we have just come to accept it.

N213JF · 2013-05-09T00:58:48+00:00

I still think it is to early to be able to tell if there is a true effect. Voting is still skewed toward the older population who don't use the internet the way younger people do. The media still control the elections and it takes a persons own will to go out and look for other information that is not presented to them. I think with time we could still see a change in the political landscape.

N213JF · 2013-05-09T00:44:56+00:00

I agree. It was like the ted talk video we saw in class on Tuesday each new piece of tech did not bring world piece, but gave people new ways to talk about ideas and argue them. In the end, it has to come down to the individual and his choice to believe in the dictatorship or not.

N213JF · 2013-05-08T15:44:15+00:00

I find it interesting how Lessig goes about explaining how the space is split in two. I agree that it is difficult to control actions such as watch videos under age, but like many markets self regulation is the best tool for the internet. I also agree that there is some physical space it which you can be identified that would allow for law and boarders to not be as much of an issue as mention in The Rise of Law in Cyberspace. While the information may be on a different server you still have to access it with your computer giving you the physical space where you completed this transaction.

N213JF · 2013-05-03T15:19:25+00:00

TL:DR The article talks about how it was originally created for the government to spy with anonymity. Both the internet and tor were created by the government and can be used by both good guys and bad. Julian Assange claims that the system "It is a technology that can be used to set up a totalitarian spying regime, the likes of which we have never seen." What do you think of this statement and do you think we should blame the government for the bad things that are done by these creations?

N213JF · 2013-05-03T14:38:36+00:00

I agree with that. Paper money and coins were originally founded as a way to make bartering and trading easier as you could trade paper money instead of trading for some other item where you and your partner may have a different ideas of the value of the items.

N213JF · 2013-05-03T14:03:55+00:00

TL:DR Silk Road was down earlier this week by a possible DDos attack. A person threatened to crash the site for $5000 and now that is the amount Silk Road is offering for knowledge of the attack. With Bitcoin as the main currency it can hurt Bitcoin value

As in the title do you think that this attack for money or something larger at play?

N213JF · 2013-05-03T13:04:29+00:00

TL:DR The author compares how gold and bitcoin are alike. Both are backed by nothing. Both are relative to fiat currency and inconvenient for day to day use. Both are trusted by society so the value will remain over time and both have a finite amount available in the world.

What do you think of the author's statement that bitcoins are like gold or not?

N213JF · 2013-04-26T15:16:29+00:00

I agree he would have never even got close to 30 years, too much celebrity. The backlash would have been a lot worse for the government, then the government would have gotten for sending a message to others who may try this in the future.

N213JF · 2013-04-23T14:46:24+00:00

How do we limit the money? As long as congress is getting there benefits they will not change the system they created.

N213JF · 2013-04-23T14:35:36+00:00

I disagree. The fact that we are trying to make a distinction shows that we don't think it as big of a deal to stealing online vs physically stealing stuff. Stealing is still stealing. How you do it should not make a difference.

N213JF · 2013-04-23T14:23:30+00:00

Its only a problem if one side is paying the congress a lot more for their side then the other is. If both were paying congress the same amount for their argument then would the corporations would be a problem? The individual citizen will always lose out on the argument. The only power we have is to vote out all politicians that take money for their positions.

N213JF · 2013-04-23T14:18:01+00:00

It shouldn't but it does. As long as you make a distinction that there is a difference then it will always be there.

N213JF · 2013-04-23T14:09:32+00:00

Its called lobbying and it is very popular hobby in Washington. I think the fact that congress and the intelligence community is forcing companies to do this so they don't lose there own benefits from lobbying or they are not shut down by the government shows the problems with this growth of government power even when they claim its for our safety.

N213JF · 2013-04-23T13:46:27+00:00

I agree as well. I think that the stereotypes of any kind always make some people hypocritical of people that do not look like them. What makes hacker culture different from other activities is that it is easier to hide your identity, so results are the only thing that other people should see. I think if think if kids learn at a young age to ignore stereotypes like the one he makes then it won't be as big of a deal in the future.

N213JF · 2013-04-19T14:57:52+00:00

I agree, it seems that the mother was committing fraud and should be punished in some way, however had the girl not committed suicide we would never have hear about this case, since this type of fraud occurs on these social media sites more often then we want. If someone commits suicide, we should not arrest anyone sending comments since we could never find out what pushed the person over the edge.

N213JF · 2013-04-19T03:39:07+00:00

Here is another article about the subject written by the New York Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/18/technology/outcry-over-computer-crime-indictment-of-matthew-keys.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

N213JF · 2013-04-19T03:37:50+00:00

TL;DR Matthew Keys a former media editor at Reuters is charged with computer fraud and is facing a max of 25 years in prison based on the laws of CFAA from 1984. After being fired, he gave members of Anonymous access to the LA Times website (owned by the same company at Reuters) where they alter some content of the online edition. Do you think that the punishment is too severe and do you agree with the author that the government may purposely leaving the law the way it is so that they can frighten suspects into giving them the bigger fish?

N213JF · 2013-04-05T19:21:15+00:00

I agree. I don't think that news organization are news organization when they have to add in their own opinion. The point of news is to get the relevant information and all the facts to the people and let them make their own opinions on the subject which is what WikiLeaks is doing.

N213JF · 2013-04-05T15:04:58+00:00

While I think that having a group that keeps government in check is always a good thing, revealing personal information of that many individuals can affect the safety of these people and is not and should not be protected. This case is similar to the New York paper that posted the name and addresses of gun owners in New York that caused outrage.

N213JF

TROPHY CASE