reduxredacted

So I said I'd follow up and I will.

I like the e-mail note. It only found one item but it said "A few items have been founding matching <my criteria>", which I take to mean that it groups its findings together in one e-mail, rather than sending an e-mail every time something is found.

Just my own pet peeve and this is disgustingly nit-picky and petty, but: "1 File(s) copied" has always bothered me. A plural check would be an improvement. Of course, had there been a plural check, I wouldn't have been able to comment yet.

I've actually been meaning to look into that one. A few friends recommended it for general organization at work, so I'm tempted to see if it'll suit me for my little hobby.

I'm not stuck with Windows, I dual boot Ubuntu, but I do not have a Mac. I know that's sort of a sin in the writing community, but then I'm not part of that community.

Thanks for the link!

Thanks. That's what I was looking for. The write-up didn't indicate what was vulnerable...I had to look at the PoC code.

I'd bet most of this community uses NoScript. My wife and family do not. I don't bother installing it on their systems because my experience has been that they simply whitelist everything that "doesn't work".

There's no point to installing NoScript on Firefox used by someone who whitelists a site he clicked on from a spam message because there was an appropriately placed breast, or claims of such of the appropriate size.

That's a good point. Quick and thorough response that if not for reading the content looked incredibly like the original. Not difficult to do "technically", but then, I didn't do it so who am I to talk?

That said, a properly placed profanity can add a punch and shock the reader ... that effect is lost when profanity is in virtually every sentence ... and shit.

The thing I love about HN: The original post was up-modded 88 points and has over 60 comments that are actually very interesting debate about elements brought up by that submission. There's a few folks pointing out the astroturfing suspicion.

"On Topic: ... anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity"

I agree with you. This submission isn't of the type I come to Hacker News to view.

On similar sites, the original post would have never made it to the front page and the comments on both would have been only about astroturfing and Microsoft hatred. ...Which is why I don't comment or waste time reading the comments on those similar sites.

"This Amazon situation is so shocking not because it's without precedent, but because it never used to make financial sense to treat a stolen copyright just as you would treat a stolen car. (And, after the P.R. repercussions of this move are played out, it may not make any financial sense in the future, either. ;)"

Precisely. It's not a stolen car, it's a technicality of overly complex copyright law that resulted in a bunch of paying customers having something removed from a device that they thought was as safe as their bookshelf.

Scale is important here. If I purchased a ten dollar book from Barnes and Noble that was later determined to be part of a hijacking of a delivery truck, they wouldn't go through the trouble. Paper is cheep, books are stolen and you'll sell more.

On one hand you have the scale of distribution that is much greater than what could be attained by jacking a delivery truck. On the other hand you have a pile of customers that have just discovered that they don't actually have any guarantees that the things they purchased on their Kindle are going to continue to be there when they wake up in the morning.

I'd prefer "We are adjusting our software in such a way that it is impossible for us to remove books from our customers' devices".

I don't know that I'd trust the statement after the text-to-speech functionality adjustments on some titles, but it would be a start.

Hey, it's software with compulsory updates via an uncontrollable backchannel. I was furious when I first read about this situation, despite not owning a Kindle (for this precise reason), but I understand the position that Amazon was in.

Hopefully they vet their third parties better, or hopefully copyright law changes in such a way that it is actually possible to vet copyright owners better. Or maybe we just lose the classics because it's too difficult to figure out which heir or organization owns the intellectual property they didn't produce.

[edit] since I can't edit the original due to replies.

I still think they stand a good chance of a class action lawsuit. The likelihood of it succeeding is less since it sounds like the issue relates to "who really owned the copyright" and they had to take down the content due to that ambiguity or fraud.

Good points, and in fairness, I don't know how to shut up, so I have to respond :o).

Point 1: You clearly have a better understanding of the software than I do and I appreciate the clarification. I still stand by the outcome, though. My own ignorance: has anyone managed to install firmware that eliminates the radio and makes it a simple GNU/Linux device (either generation)? That would make it more appealing to me assuming it has acceptable storage.

Point 2: Agreed that the experience is much different than an Eee. I rarely read text on paper. Most of my reading is on inexpensive, large LCDs with uneven back-lighting. The Eee display is an improvement to my eyes, though I've read on the eSlick (foxit's product) for well over 15 minutes and it is pleasant (minus the black and white which is unnecessary for books usually).

Point 3: Here's where I have to disagree: Amazon announced that the latest iteration of the Kindle would have Text to Speech, and had to back down. What I know is that if I purchase this device, I am purchasing something that I cannot control without an exceptional effort (hacking it myself, time I don't have). They own the front end and the back channel.

As to your final point: Yes. I'm a PC gamer, not an Xbox 360 guy for precisely this reason. I don't like mandatory game updates or a "sanctioned" selection of DLC. I'll concede on the iPhone comment since all mobile phones in the US suffer from the same disease to a greater or lesser degree.

The difference is that I believe Amazon has already rendered a large portion of the installed base of devices less useful via over-the-air provisioning. GNU/Linux on the Kindle aside, the GUI is the functionality and whispernet is the control when the two are married in a device. Assertions (or lack thereof) and promises are as good as the screen they're read on.

[edit] So I'll make one more point, which is that it looks like Amazon may well have removed and refunded due to fraud perpetrated upon them because they expected that the copyright belonged to the person signing the rights over.

It's nice to know that Amazon didn't respond to the whims of a publisher but tried to make a wrong right again. But the outcome was still a serious wrong for the customer.

If they had been printing copies of the book based on the claims of permission from someone who didn't own the copyright, they would have sued that individual after being sued themselves. I'd get to keep my book that was purchased in good faith.

Nobody wins here.

Good point. It's not really Whispernet, specifically, it's it combined with control.

Taking the iPhone Kindle app out of the picture (though it's probably relevant, I just don't know much about it, so I'll leave it alone for the moment)... Whispernet and software that is in the complete control of Amazon gives them a capability it can't have on my Netbook.

The thing that always concerned me about the Kindle/Whispernet is that they could use it to control all of the content on the Kindle. Lets say Amazon decides that only Kindle purchased e-books are allowed on the device ... one software update later and your imported PDF files are gone (legally or otherwise). I don't think they'd really be that nasty, but it's not as though the software installed is available for inspection. If the publishers push hard enough and the circumstances are right, who knows?

I'm not begging for a GNU/Linux e-book reader. I paid about the price of a Kindle for a low-end Eee PC with a big battery. It lasts about 7 hours (not 9.5 as advertised, but enough). To me, the Kindle is something undefinable. What do I get for $300?. Text to speech on all of my books? Sometimes. The ability to import PDF files? So far. Getting to read the books you purchased... unless...

I "get" that Amazon lives at the whims of their publishers. Unfortunately, the book publishers live at the whims of the consumer and the conditions of the marketplace. They should take notes from what's going on with music today. Scanners are cheap, and OCR software is very good with print. Compressed, text-only renditions of a book are tiny and bandwidth to the home is plentiful. Top that off with an inexpensive device that gets acceptable battery life and offers convenience and an acceptable screen for reading text... It certainly sounds a lot like Napster and mp3's to me.

Criminally illegal, no. But that leaves open civil suits, which are sure to come.

1) You can sue anyone for anything. The US does not have a "loser pays" rule, though frivolous lawsuits can include attorney's fees.

2) Class action lawsuits are very profitable for lawyers when they win. They need to convince a jury of 12 people who couldn't get out of jury duty that "Big Corporation" was wrong. They get a percentage of the total judgment.

My guess is that some lawyer will pick this one up. They'll sue Amazon based on "common sense" and Amazon will realize that a jury isn't going separate a "book" from an "e-book". The plaintiff's lawyers will equate it to removing a book from your bookshelf in your house.

Amazon will argue commas in their TOS or Amazon will settle. On top of it all, Amazon demonstrates why I purchased a netbook instead of a Kindle for my e-book reading pleasure ... and why I don't buy e-books that I can't remove the DRM from.

Step 1 - Remove legitimately purchased e-books that the publisher "changed their mind on"

Step 2 - Remove books that cannot be identified as legitimately purchased.

The "whispernet" functionality is often talked about as this great feature of the Kindle. It's the single biggest reason that I won't buy one.

Thank you for not using JavaScript unnecessarily.

In fact, thank you for not requiring me to create an account or register or asking if I wanted to receive valuable offers via e-mail.

I'll comment back if it finds anything, but as far as the paint on the outside goes, it looks nice and is something I would definitely use.

[edit] - technically you did create an account and I did have to click a link to activate. I still stand by the thank you (and that's just smart going anyway).

Better than you think: "Stay-at-Home Parent"

I have to disagree with this one. My wife has been a domestic engineer almost since we were married. I wouldn't do her job (actually, I would if she died and I had to).

She does everything around the house. She makes all of the baby food, cooks all of the breakfasts, lunches and dinners and educates our children who -- at their young age -- have three settings: histeric laughter/screaming and yelling.

She doesn't have to commute, but in order to keep the children sleeping through the night, she has a more rigid schedule than I do.

When the kids are older, I'm sure it gets easier, but it's no picnic when you have two under age three.

Interesting. I'm very much against the use of jamming and tend to agree with the CTIA stance on the matter. There are benefits to allowing the staff of prisons to carry cell phones and those benefits would be gone.

In addition, there's always the possibility that the deployment of jamming equipment results in nearby areas suffering degraded signals. It's not like putting up a concrete wall.

Detection alone wouldn't be sufficient, and an authenticated system seems like it would be very tricky to sort out since the prison is going to be sharing cell towers with non-prison areas.

In all three cases, I don't think it will eliminate the problem, but like most security issues, it's best to throw everything you can at it so if one component fails there's three backing you up.

"He didn't know how to manage social contact."

Correct. During the time when he was learning social skills, he was taught that all social contact was negative.

It's clear from the essay that this bothers him 25 years later and it should.

That's a very good point. The kids I meet from homeschool co-ops learn in groups with age ranges.

There are twenty or so kids per co-op, yet bullying is virtually non-existant. The other thing that happens is the ten year olds talk to the older children and adults as though they are peers. They don't connect age with wisdom or authority.

You go through pain in professional sports because your muscles must be broken down in order to build up and your brain has to master the skill and precision required to play the game. You are also typically coached or trained by someone with more experience than you until you are more experienced than them.

How does spending most of the important years of emotional development experiencing only abuse assist in making one creative? Maybe by having extra time on your hands, but other than that it doesn't seem like it would be something valuable or even connected in any way, let alone _required_.

I think it's correlation vs. causation. People who are creative are non-conformist. Non-conformists tend to get bullied in High School.

Some of the most creative and interesting people I have ever met were homeschooled. They had _some_ negative social experiences growing up, but nothing that would have amounted in their lifetimes what some kids at my school experienced in a day.

Your experiences sound about right. Most people end up in a fight, get punched, mocked, and kicked in real life.

I respectfully disagree with "most people get over their bullying".

You are emotionally developing throughout your teen years. If most of that emotional development is stunted as a result of consistent bullying, you are going to be affected by that the rest of your life. You'll "get over it" in the way one heals from a serious burn, but there will be scars.

Working in IT, I have met more than a few people with these scars. One individual, when elevated to Manager, turned from being a reasonable person to work with (socially awkward at times), to being one of the most horrible people I have ever known.

I just sent that link to a group of parents that I am going to be homeschooling with (and to my parents who think it's "a horrible idea"). I didn't get anywhere near the abuse this individual received, but I had my share, too. I have met so many people in IT and science that are still colored in some way by the "socialization" they received in school.

I worked for one of the most miserable human beings I have ever met. Brilliantly smart, but now that he was on the other side, he bullied everyone around him (including his boss, who eventually fired him). I have had many coworkers who had been beat up so often, knocked down so often, that when they have an "out of the box" idea, they simply don't share it.

I want my kids to be brought up in an environment that encourages learning, and peer learning via our co-op. I went to my High School reunion for almost the same reasons MarkCC didn't. I was amazed to learn of the fate of the individuals who gave me so much crap. A few were dead because of their behavior.

The hack is done. It appears that Twitter had poor security policies, or that Twitter employees weren't following them. Either way, the information is out there and the person(s) who chose to break in took the evil route.

Ev Williams got it. He's handled this situation very well. I'd invest in this company based on his response. He's appealed to the sympathy of all of us and essentially said he can live with the disclosure that TC will deliver despite it being something I'd be happy to toss my life savings at to suppress. Reality: it's out. There's no suppressing.

TC is operating as a journalistic outfit. "Unnamed Sources in the Pentagon", "An employee speaking on the condition of anonymity" and "A private investigation firm hired to break into the voicemail accounts of prominent individuals" IS journalism in the 21st century. TC, on the other hand, has been quite transparent. They stated upfront that they received a pile of (unsolicited) juicy information from a person who compromised accounts from Twitter employees.

TC could have posted the raw text of every message, removed names, been sued, gotten more publicity for having been sued, shined more light on the topic and become the place everyone pretends to hate but visits anyway because of the "nipples". Thus far, they haven't. They've given an insight into a company that folks on the outside who watch Twitter shouldn't find all that surprising ... it's just more directly stated in the terms of a business person summarizing reality.

Which brings up the next inevitable situation: At some point the entirety of what was collected will be made public. Hopefully it will be done after TC has had their last point to make.

Maybe those paying attention won't have stopped paying attention, but at this point ... they've begun to feel sympathetic about the situation and grant the benefit of the doubt to Ev and company.

I won't go so far as to say that journalism isn't journalism without these tactics, or that ignoring the back channel means just publishing press releases. There's a fine line. I think it's too early to know if TC crossed that line.

Full disclosure: I enjoy reading Arrington's posts. He calls out "Elephants in the room" when a lot of the tech media pretends the elephant is invisible. Yes, it's a business advantage that lends itself to accusations of tabloid journalism because calling out elephants irresponsibly results in calling specs of dust "elephants" and TC has been guilty of that.

This is an interesting problem.

You're right. They'd be the Aardvark.

I remember looking for a movie that had a number in the title at a local movie rental place ten years ago (both the name of the movie and the place escapes me). I expected to find them in front of the "A" movies only to discover that they had alphabetized assuming the number was spelled.

Sad to say, the movie was probably something along the lines of "10 Things I Hate About You" being spelled Ten Things I Hate About You, but as a geek and a man, I am unwilling to admit that.

Put in some preceding exclamation points and some spaces for good measure and they'll live in infamy in (almost) every usenet newsreader.

Two problems, both personal:

I love Real Time Strategy games and this looks like something (more ambitious than) the Civilization family of games ... which cost me two years of my early adulthood.

I write software and I'd want nothing more than to see something like this "happen".

... I have a wife and kids, now. I'm going to have to pretend I never clicked that link.

"Whereas, it's quite common in IT for micromanagers to overrule the professionals."

I completely agree with that statement.

IT is a discipline of intellect. Managers are successful when they understand the strengths of those they manage and allow them to take ownership of the things they are responsible for. Men (and women) of reason, don't thrive in an environment of button pushing and lever pulling.

Micromanagers destroy innovative thinking and ultimately destroy themselves by pushing their staff into a cycle of mediocrity.

"Most IT projects are a failure in one way or another"

Managers and companies who understand this won't miss out on the handful of breakthrough innovations that transform their business as a result of a brilliant mind rethinking the way business is being done.

Jerriji, I felt like I had to reply to this because I don't think your wrong, and in light of my last reply I think I may have come off the same way.

"If you were poor and still are poor, then it's your own problem, just get out of my sight"

I didn't take that away from the topic at hand. People unhappy in their IT jobs are employed and not poor in the Western world. So the unhappiness comes from something else. I've seen very well paid developers just fall off a cliff and suddenly hate their job.

I don't understand the reasons, but I don't doubt that they are all that different from the reasons the rest of the working world faces. Sometimes it's time to change careers. As human beings, change is feared (or family obligations come into play that make accepting risk less desirable than doing a job you hate).

I feel compassion for those individuals, but in as much as I have to work with them, my compassion is driven to finding ways to identify "great things" about the job they hate.

Negative attitudes are poison and there seems to be a lot of that in IT. I can't tell you how many meetings I attend where the various stakeholders in our organization are at eachothers throats and my boss or me are called in to mediate. It's not an exercise of mediation, it's an exercise of breaking a cycle of frustration, taking the emotion out of it and focusing on the problem as the thing that gets the brunt of the righteous anger (it's amazing what happens when you take three pissed off people and focus their anger at the problem rather than at one another).

Sometimes we're in departments that are only noticed when "nothing is broken" and are hammered on when some extraordinary circumstance causes something to fail. We resent the fact that the people doing the yelling don't understand how unpreventable that circumstance was. It's a tough roll to sit in and tolerate and breeds contempt.

But focusing on that element of the job IS poisonous.

I have noticed this phenomenon.

I hate it. I've been working in IT for most of my life in one capacity or another. I LOVE my job. I'm not saying it's easy. I'm the sole income provider for my family of soon to be four and I put in well over 60 hours a week most weeks (salary, and up until now, likely below market value).

I am intellectually stimulated in my job. I have learned how to work with complicated personalities and have learned how not to be a complicated person. I've also learned that a good 20% of my job involves motivating those around me into realizing that the things they are doing are important and fantastic.

I don't get the bad attitudes...My job involves solving problems and building things. I enjoy seeing the result of my work get traffic. I enjoy solving complicated problems. I even enjoy documenting the solution because I know that a small percentage of the folks who have to read it will appreciate what was done.

I see a sense of entitlement amongst some of the folks I work with. They are very smart individuals and expect people around them to just recognize that despite their inability to practically apply their genius into something productive. They're like a jet engine sitting at idle. Lots of potential, lack of motion. I don't know what causes that.

It helps that I work for some of the best people I have ever known. I've seen the "it is what it is" attitude and it drives me crazy. I see a lot of folks in IT that learned how to write software very young, were treated badly for being a nerd and haven't matured into men of action. Perhaps I'm naval gazing a little, as it took me a while to get past that.

But "we build, we create, we solve, we are the great minds that conquer." "It is what it is" is a disease. It is what we choose to do with it.

I imagine that attitude that makes IT folks hate their jobs is the same attitude that will make them hate any job.

I'm really not trying to condemn those who are in a rough spot with technical managers who have no business managing human beings.

I'm just pleased with menloparkbum's assessment. "I would rather not draw that crowd over here, or have their stories reposted, or even links to that forum. That sort of negativity is boring at best and POISONOUS at worst."

Does anyone have a cache of that page? The link appears dead and it sounds really interesting based on the comments :o)

"The problem is that economic growth in the US over the past several decades has largely been driven by urban development (for which read: suburban sprawl)"

Detroit is a nightmare, and I don't think there are many people who fully understand just how bad it is out here unless you live around here.

There are basically three pockets of Detroit that you can walk around on-foot. Take a ride on "The People Mover" (a very poorly thought out monorail) and you'll run through areas of Downtown that are good and areas of Downtown that look like they were used for bombing practice. Venture beyond Downtown, and you understand why some property in Detroit is selling for $1 and why that's highway robbery.

I used to do contract work for several companies. One of our companies was a charter school just on the edge of the border of Detroit. You'd take Mound Rd. to get there. Mound is a mile south of Van Dyke, which starts in the heart of Downtown and ends in farm country. The progression was clear...the closer you got to the edge of Detroit the more things started looking like a third world country.

It's subtle at first: recognizable brand names start to become very sparse. Then occupied buildings in places other than intersections vanish. The intersections are littered with Check Cashing Liqour/General stores. Those are replaced in kind by the same but with bars on the windows and graffiti everywhere and eventually even those are gone replaced by what was once a Liquor store but is now a square of abandoned cement.

My parents and my wife's parents all lived in Detroit when they were young, as did all of their friends. They got out when crime went up. With the plummeting price of housing, even those who were once way too poor to live outside The City are getting out. Crime has increased in the area I live, but violent crime is still rare. Those who can find a way out, get out.

The city's decline won't stop. The burbs have created "The City" experience with great restaurants, great entertainment venues, great shopping and safe living.

Most of Detroit's Mayors were of the quality of Kwame Kilpatrick (other than Dennis Archer). The people of the city resent the folks who left, and folks running for mayor or city counsel do best if they blame Detroit's problems on the suburbs.

Completely agree.

He mentioned Pandora and that was the first service that came to mind for me. I wanted a way to donate to them, but couldn't find it (frankly, I didn't look very hard either, I'm sure if I sent an e-mail they'd find a way for me to send money).

A year ago I purchased a "registered" copy of 7-zip for $20 some odd dollars because I wanted to support the development of that application. It afforded me e-mail support or something like that, but I have never bothered the developer. I just loved the application.

I don't command a six figure income. I'm also the sole financial provider for a family of four. I recognize value when I see it. It is a sort of "tip" to the people who I'm reaping benefits from and I have no problem showing my gratitude monetarily.

So ... another way to look at this is ... you have a winning product if people are asking for ways to pay you for what you're giving away.