[MLB-WIRELESS] Applications on the melb-wireless network

[dwayne]

Ben Anderson wrote:
> 

> With a good political advocate, it's still possible.  I'm not this person,
> anyone want to step up to the plate?

I can have a bash at it after easter.
I was driving past the Brunswick Town Hall and thought about asking them as
they have a history of being very progressive.  Plus they have a hall we might
be able to use.

Do we have a spot for the next meeting? Should I talk to the CERES people?
They are in Lees Street Brunswick.

Or Lee. Thingy.

> Show the council how a UPN can make them money, 

And it can do this by ... ?

> and is generally beneficial
> for the community, and I suspect they'll be with us.  If not, then they're
> not really representing the people and should be voted out.  

Jawohl.

> And presented
> it this way to media outlets will probably get this situation changed quite
> quickly.

Interesting tack on it.  It's certainly worth a go, though.  One for the
Propaganda Squad, I guess.
 

> > Doesn't tcp/ip have a priority which is never used?  That was the basis of
> > varian's pay-for-priority scheme years ago, I'm assuming that is still the
> > case.
> 
> If it does, it's not good enough for what I'm talking about.

This is a silly statement to make until you know what I'm talking about.

And no, I don't either  :-)
 

> None of those links functioned at all...  Anyone got a mirror?

I have, and they ALL worked for me last night, I tested them.

Anyone who wants either file mail me and I'll mail it to them, or, errr, keep
trying? Beats me.


> So we use an encryption technique where there's multiple keys for each piece
> of data...  One will decrypt it too a picture of papa smurf, the other will
> decrypt it to xyz.  Prove which key is "correct".  Mathematically, there
> should be a lot of keys that decrypt something into pretty much *any*
> arbitary data.  

Man, you don't just reinvent the wheel, you leap right into caterpillar tracks
and giant stalking leg-things.
Can you *imagine* the size of the data stream you'd need, plus the
computational overhead? Per packet?


> Which means the key is more a representation of the actual
> data, than the data itself.  Posession of the key that decrypts a large
> number to xyz should then be illegal, not possession of that number.  

"should"   

"test case"


"you"

"feel free. Bucko"


> Of
> course, this is all theoretical, and what I think makes sense...  Once we
> start talking kiddie porn etc, all the conservative mummies start going
> crazy restricting everything...  And governments tend to like that, and
> leverage that in being able to select the policy they want to control...
> </pessimism>

I, personally, would rather we just don't do bustable stuff, than *presume*
we'll be safe, and *assume* that our mad haxxor skillz will keep The Man out. 

> And there is no spoon :)

Dang.  Candygram?


> > Except for in britain where they'll just assume the worst and sentence
> > accordingly  (really, that's how the law works).
> 
> What the hell happened to "innocent until proven guilty" and "benefit of the
> doubt" -- has the whole world gone barmy?

This is arguably the dumbest question I have seen since September 12th.


Yes.


Totally.


> > I, personally, would not rely on unbreakable encryption since they can
> > break *you* to get at your encryption.
> 
> But if everythings encrypted, they can't take the entire population of the
> network to court...  


You're joking, right?  They will if they have to, it depends on how many of us
there are.
Think of the police resources used to crack any crime. Consider what they
*might* be able to wave at us, hysterically, if they cannot see into the
network.


That being said, I'm totally in favour of max encryption, but to keep hackers
and snoops out, not asio.

Hell, they'll just hack into out computers to read the plaintext.


> To be able to do that they have to have some reason to
> take a small section to court, which means that at least they have to be
> able to decrypt or prove to be able to get a warrant to start with...  It's
> more than just the "pure" legal interpretation, there's the realistic "able
> to prosecute" factor as well, and I think that a generically encrypted
> network leverages this quite well, despite the pure legal ramifications...
> 
> MP3's of copyrighted works are "illegal" but they're not "illegal" yet, if
> you know what I mean.

"should"   

"test case"


"you"

"feel free. Bucko"

> > > Yes, the encryption will need to improve
> > > along with the speed of computers to maintain the safety of the networks
> > > nodes.
> >
> > Watch legal developments as well.
> 
> Sure, but hopefully the legal developments will catch up to us,
> incorporating what actually makes sense...

"should"   

"test case"


"you"

"feel free. Bucko"



Don't count on it.
I mean hell, look at the dog's breakfast they made of the data casting laws,
to protect entrenched interests.

That's a thought, can we legally transmit video?
 

> which still isn't a problem as unless there actually is a way to factorise
> large numbers quickly, they aren't going to be able to do anything with the
> data they've got anyway.

!!

Errr, they do? The New York Times took 3 days to crack Al Qaeda's strongest
encryption.  How long will it take ASIO to break ours? I'm not going to rely o
encryption to keep the govt out.  Especially given the recently-found weakness
in the RSA algorithm, or whichever one it was.


> > We are in heady times for this sort of power-to-the-people stuff.
> 
> Perhaps.  There's been "revolutions" much more 'out in the open' than this.

Errr, I meant that we are all targets nowadays and it's not a good time to do
it./

Not that that's stopping me.  But it'd be cool if we were where we are now 2
years ago.

> We're comparitivly behind the scenes, low-priority stuff...  We're unlikely
> to cause civil unrest, so governments will probably largely leave us
> alone...

I'd like to think so.  However we should not rely on this.

> GPS is accurate enough...  I don't want a nutter who's pissed that I
> challenged his idea of the colour red appearing at my house, or my
> neighbours house.  25M accuracy is probably good enough to isolate a single
> house anyway.  I'd prefer not to transmit this data, I just haven't come up
> with an alternative yet, and I'm not sure there is one.


Okay.


I was thinking this when I wrote it, actually, but thought, hmmm, naaaah, we'd
be okay.

Dwayne

--
To unsubscribe, send mail to minordomo at wireless.org.au with a subject of 'unsubscribe melbwireless'  
Archive at: http://www.wireless.org.au/cgi-bin/minorweb.pl?A=LIST&L=melbwireless
IRC at: au.austnet.org #melb-wireless