Pan

Members
  • Content count

    94
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5 Neutral

About Pan

  • Rank
    Gibson Hacker
  • Birthday 12/31/1910

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://pan.sensoryresearch.net
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Location
    Detroit
  1. What type of radio are you interested in? First thing would be to learn about the different types of frequencies across the scannable radio spectrum so that you know what types of materials (antenna, receiver, software, etc.) you need. To do this, you can have a listen to the "Off the Grid Voice/Data Communications" talk from The Last H.O.P.E. Conference... http://www.thelasthope.org/talks.html You can also view the FCC chart delineating frequency allocations... http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/radio-spectrum-allocation Once you get a basic sense of which frequencies you hope to send/receive on, you can get a better sense of what type of tools you need.
  2. Adaptive systems (whether phone, internet, electricity) require back-and-forth communication, often with information that is identifying in one way or another. As a systems person, I'm not so concerned with this concept over all. We do need to have clear guidelines and laws on the use of this type of software, and stiff penalties for its misuse.
  3. You'll notice in the comments of that article, someone mentions the fact that it's much easier to meet people all over the world via the internet. In one sense that is true. However, that is directed communication. Though there are some websites that have random connections set up between users (e.g. chat roulette), most communication is mediated. Radio is more instantaneous and random. You don't know who is going to hear you and who you will hear.
  4. I have an R20. You won't be disappointed.
  5. Check out JK Audio for hybrids that you can use to record (some of them portable) http://www.jkaudio.com/
  6. This discussion is being framed in a certain way that may not provide the best overall view. Ports are are closed on institutional networks to maintain network quality (bandwidth), network integrity (functionality) and security. Actually, this should be standard for any network. Use only what you need. It's not that the school is being unhelpful. It's that they are trying to maintain the above. You've admitted that you want to circumvent the closed ports to play games. Networked games can be bandwidth hogs. Multiply that by all the students at your school who like to play games and you can see a potential problem. Likewise, opening non-standard ports expands the attack vector. Now multiply that by all the non-technical users at your school who don't know how to protect their machines and you can see a potential problem. Schools and other institutions have to adhere to a myriad of security and privacy policies (e.g. HIPAA). That adherence sometimes trumps other things such as personal entertainment. Lastly, managing ports for non-academic use could be a logistical nightmare, depending on the size and complexity of the network and the size and resources of the network administration staff. Quite frankly, primary, middle and high schools do have a vested interest in maintaining the focus of the student. College is a little different because the users are legally independent and have theoretically developed their overall learning skills at that point. Most colleges have less restrictive networks than lower level institutions. I'm in no way meaning to discourage your exploration of VPNs, just providing some perspective on why the school might not seem to be cooperative.
  7. Bio and animal research show that "doing the right thing" manifests itself in many creatures of the earth. It's actually not unique to humans. As a simple thought experiment, try to explain why cats have been known to save other pets, including dogs, from burning buildings. There is absolutely no religious component to that compassion. There is also no known survival component to it. In other words, it originates in something we have yet to understand. In terms of "illegal things", as long as I can remember, those discussions never took place in detail on public forums. Granted, I didn't hang on IRC, but all other scenes, the best discussion happened between a few select people who spoke out of band after observing/interacting with each other in the public forum. So the desire to keep the Binrev forums alive and well by curtailing discussion of illegal actions is actually a help to the community. People will meet, interact and eventually decide whom to trust for things that may cross the line. By the way, we all do eventually trust somebody - whether it's the hacker in the forum or the perceived dude in the sky. Not all of your beliefs and skills come from direct experience and verification.
  8. Hey folks, Apparently, this morning Anonymouse released text and video regarding their recent DDOS attacks. I was able to find the text and an image from the movie. What they are trying to do makes perfect sense. Stopping the flow of information to argue for the flow of information, and aligning oneself with the civil rights movement of the 1960's, is certainly valid. Right? Please pass these documents far and wide so that we may spread the message of Anonymouse. http://i55.tinypic.com/5xmwhx.png http://pastebin.com/bBn5RWkd ------------------------- Anonymouse - Project: LameAss - Join the Mickey Mouse Approach to Social Change ----------------------------- “In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.” ~George Orwell “You may think your actions are meaningless and that they won’t help, but that is no excuse, you must still act.” ~ Mahatma Gandhi “He who gives up freedom for safety deserves neither” ~ Ben Franklin "The most important thing to do in your life is to not interfere with somebody else's life." - Frank Zappa Hello World. We are Anonymouse. What you do or do not know about us is irrelevant. What is relevant is how much we aggrandize ourselves. We have decided to write to you, the media, and all citizens of the free world (with qualifying purchase) to inform you of our intentions, potential targets, and our ongoing anti-information campaign for Freedom of Douchebaggery. Anonymouse is continuously campaigning for Freedom of Douchebaggery everywhere, in all forms, for all platforms. Our efforts have been, at best, misguided. We are not a terrorist organization or a group of “hackers” as governments, demagogues, and the media would have you believe. We are a homogenous group of script kiddies that touch ourselves over every aspect of philosophy, religion, and politics that seems to justify our existence. That includes randomly associating ourselves with important social movements in history. At this time, Anonymouse, as a distributed misguidedness, is focused on prolonging Freedom of Douchebaggery on the Internet. We ask the world to support us, not for your sake, but for the sake of our egos. When script kiddies control the flow of information, they distract you from answering important questions about freedom in our society. We will persist until our dying breath -- or until we have to use our computer to play G.T.A. 4. Pay us attention, citizens and governments of the world. History is full of examples that show that social and political progress can be derailed when people act unthinkingly. As an example in recent history: Take the Transparency Movement in the United States in the 2010's. The movement got infiltrated by self-serving script kiddies whose Distributed Denial of Service attacks had results inverse to the movement's goals. In their efforts, the script kiddies managed to derail the transparency movement by preventing true dialog with the american public and managed to inspire drastic response by police and governments by refusing to act civil. In the spirit and memory of those script kiddies and many others, we will refuse to be silenced. We will DDOS everyone who disagrees with us! It is here that we proclaim: Any individual, organization, corporation, and/or government entity which supports Freedom of Douchebaggery and a Cheap Joke Ridden Internet is an ally of Anonymouse. If you work to inspire dialog about Freedom of Expression and a Free Internet, your efforts will be derailed. Where others have made this promise and failed, we make this promise and aim to distract everyone. We would like to ask that you as a citizen, organization, media entity, or government do the same by joining us. Signed, Anonymouse
  9. I've heard quite a bit of nostalgia for the the early years of the public net recently. I didn't get on IRC until a few years ago, but have been involved in a lot of other network community stuff since the late 80's/early 90s. There was a different feel, a sort of blind optimism. What happened was that the dream did become a reality in one sense: practically everyone has a computer and everyone has access to the global net. With that comes all the pop culture, all the drab business content, the constant marketing, constant nostalgia, etc. Now, every fetish you can possibly imagine is available with a simple web search. This has provided us an overwhelming amount of data. The interesting nuggets are still out there, but they are buried. Can we get back there? Probably not. You can't get there from here. However, there are mutations happening right now in a new generation of people. They are using the new methods of communication (social networking, etc.). They are building the new underground/alternative scenes. I have faith that youthful curiosity and creativity will remain embedded in humanity. It goes in cycles and is more apparent at certain times than others.
  10. Since you don't have any SIP telephony administration experience, and probably don't want to blow things up at work, might it be a good idea to get a solid understanding? That may not fulfill the qualifiers of "quick" and "free", but you'll perform your tasks better with less risk to your users. Maybe start with reading up on the basics of SIP Telephony. Then, move on to the specifics of the Avaya technology.
  11. This has very little to do with selling software. AT&T, like other providers, tracks ICC-IDs. As an aside, the quality and access controls related to the store are not necessarily a bad thing. Cuts down on bad/dangerous applications, cuts down on fraud and most importantly simplifies the process of installing and maintaining applications. Lastly, I'm assuming people heard about Android doing a remote wipe of an app from the Android store. Now, lets hear the same critics attack the Android store. GO!...
  12. They weren't friends. Manning approached Lamo.
  13. And I happen to think that's ridiculous. But that's only what you typed. The implication was that: In other words, important Government and/or military information - unless the person divulging it really fucking knows what they're doing. Hey, man, it's hard enough trying to guess how much of what Poulson and Lamo are saying is true, and what their motivations were, and if those motivations were independent of each other, and whether or not this was a set-up to begin with, etc., for me to sit around and ponder just who might be cognizant of what effects and who might be a bit funny in the head. You are probably 100% correct that Manning had no clue what he was doing and that he probably shouldn't have even been given the opportunity to pull these shenanigans in the first place. But that is not the subject at hand. What we're talking about here is whether or not it's cool to drop a dime on some jerk who thinks he's talking to a journalist, and whether or not Lamo has adequately explained himself. Whether intended or not, this ended up seeming a lot like an attack on Wikileaks. And while I don't think it was an intentional attack by Lamo, Wikileaks does. For whatever that's worth (probably not much). How, exactly, is that a defense of Adrian Lamo's actions? This story is now - for better or worse - a story and a discussion about Adrian Lamo, his actions and his motivations and not Bradley Manning or his actions. And what the fuck was with Hakim Bey? I agree that not everyone needs to know everything - but I don't agree with fucking little boys or that the Moors were black, or that African Spacemen colonized America B.C. (Before Columbus), along with many other things that Hakim Bey asserts, or theorizes, or mindfucks us with. Shit, for a while, I thought Hakim Bey was Robert Anton Wilson. I also thought Thomas Pynchon was Robert Anton Wilson until RAW died nearly penniless. Sometimes I still think those things, and honestly this whole discussion is convoluted enough without quoting anarchist, pedophile, Sufi mystics. Informants don't get the benefit of the doubt. Adrian Lamo has given his reasons for his actions, and his defenders are merely inventing scenarios which may or may not be accurate in order to justify those actions. I'm simply dealing with the information provided, not what if's and maybe's. As far as me doing "a disservice to the discussion by not at least attempting to acknowledge that Adrian maybe did have a higher motive", I acknowledged that Adrian may have had motives unknown (higher or otherwise) in my very first post in this thread: And, interestingly enough, I don't think that apologists inventing maybe's and excuses is a "disservice to the discussion"; I just don't happen to agree, that's all. EDIT, I missed this: So, what you're saying is that in this case, the flow of information should have some constraints (i.e. for "ethical" reasons, it should have come from someone other than the source). Nope. I'm saying that the whole situation seems really fishy, that's pretty much it. Well, that and the fact that this may have been a serious violation of journalistic ethics. But mostly that I smell a rat - figuratively. My musings earlier about free information were more of a commentary on "hacker" ethics and values, regarding the description of Lamo as an "ex-hacker", than anything else. Define "important"? It's important that we practice foreign policy to avoid getting the world blown up or the very least, getting soldiers and/or civilians hurt. I'd say that is substantially important. I'm curious why the folks who are so vehemently against what Lamo did never have a response to the issue of foreign diplomacy and security. Those people, including yourself, tend to gloss over it. Yes, absolutely, the person divulging better have a fucking clue what it is that they're doing. Manning was not in the mental state nor did he have the experience to know what he was doing. Yes, we *do* have to be stop idiots from ruining it for everyone else. I'll avoid mixing analogies too much, but it's like the douchebags burning stuff in Toronto right now. They *ruin* it for the people working hard to change the system (including those underground). That is dangerous. Dangerous needs to be stopped if there is a greater cause. See, this is exactly what I'm talking about: THIS STORY IS ABOUT MANNING. Manning's mental state, previous actions and proposed actions. He was threatening to do stupid shit that could have serious consequences. Threats need to be neutralized. The only reason that this is in any way about Lamo is because he happened to be the person who had enough common sense to stop it. People need to define "informant". You (and every other critic) have never called the police on something you thought was a threat to human life? About Poulson and Lamo relationship: Every journalist has an "inside" guy/gal. That's nothing new. If you follow the timeline outlined since the original article, it's clear that Poulson didn't get involved until after the shit had hit the fan. Anytime someone throws out comments about "meds", my attention starts to wane because it's more about personal attacks and easy-write-offs than looking at facts over time. Everyone seems to have rushed to judgement before even getting the entire story. Another thing that "hackers" don't want to touch is that if Manning continued he would have given an even worse name to the hacker scene. Ruining diplomacy and putting people's lives at risk is not something that will garner a lot of love.
  14. Nice Beave! I'm definitely going to play around with it.
  15. So, what you're saying is that in this case, the flow of information should have some constraints (i.e. for "ethical" reasons, it should have come from someone other than the source).