B0rg

Members
  • Content count

    98
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by B0rg

  1. hhmmm, I've not been there in quite awhile now, maybe a couple years or so but that's where I always go when I'm looking for some mobile related stuff that I can't find elsewhere. Usually it has just enough information for me to find another source! Anyway, you'r probably right about it being past its prime but I like their archives. Sorry
  2. mobile.box.sk is a good place to start
  3. Because forums are usually built on top of a database and there are no specific files for each area, gaining access to a restricted area is not a matter of getting to see a protected file but a matter of gaining access to the database with permissions higher than the ones you usually have. It's not a question of browser agent but one of credentials: username and password. stealing cookies, sniffing passwords, capturing an active session, sql injection, xss to capture passwords, and bruteforce cracking of the password are some of possible attack vectors to gain access to a restricted area.
  4. Hope this helps you: http://www.bootdisk.com/usb.htm
  5. hhmmm, even if the result of his actions was a good one I can't say that I agree with his actions. I wouldn't want a trojan in my machine with the reason for it being that they would be monitoring everyone while looking for pedophiles! Big brother alert!!
  6. I get it, I just don't agree with it. And that's a fallacy. I'm sorry that you think that I'm a fool, but that's your problem, not mine.
  7. You can always set up your own DNS server!
  8. From hamachi website: Correct me if I'm wrong, but what I understood from the site is that although they cannot decrypt/read the traffic between two peers, they can trace your location. So if prompted by Gov or LE they will most likely give up that information. Good for hiding content of communications but not a solid method to hide location.TOR + Hamachi!
  9. I do tend to use the terms "idea" and "information" on this context interchangebly. My mistake. Sorry for that. The implementation of an idea is still an idea on how to implement another idea and both are information, so it is all the same to me! Read my previous posts with this in mind and I will think about that and try to be more carefull in the future with it.
  10. Your point of view is fully logical. I simply disagree with the premise! I don't think that the creator has the right to controll how his idea/information can be distributed. He has the right to do it or not in the first place and to decide how he, himself, does it, but he has no right in deciding on how anyone else that also has that information does it nor does he has the right of stopping some else of doing it. What if two creators develop the same piece of information independently? Should one be removed from the controll cycle just because the other did it first? That's what pattents where made for. There actually exist some examples of this in history. The fact that someone else also distributes the information in some way does not interfere with the creator's right to continue to do so in any way he desires. Information is intangible. It cannot be controlled that way. I'm only opposed to making money at the expense of someone else's work like selling pirated information or, using your example, selling some slightly modified version of any open source project, not because it means removing that controll from the hands of the creators but because it means making money at their expense. I'm all for recognition. Any one that acomplishes something deserves it as well as any adequate compensation. What I'm against is closing the information and ransoming it after it was produced.
  11. That makes sense. But it's still limiting my rights with something that is now mine. To me that makes all the difference when talking about ethics or morals. One is making money at the expense of others, the other is not. Right, and? That tought process is all based on the principle that one can own an idea or a piece of information. One cannot so... If I give you some piece of information I've relinquished total control of that piece of information, shared it with you. You can now do the same with other people and that doesn't affect my power to do the same. Results in losses on the number of people that will go get the products from them instead of from me, not in losses on their ability to give those products in the first place. This is why I don't have any problems with it, consider it moral and actively defend it. Yes, I do consider myself a moral person. I fully see this problem as one of selfishness where the creator wants to be the only distributor of something that anyone can effectively distribute. That is selfishness, nothing else. Right once again. Piracy is not a business model (money economy model), it's gift model (gift economy model). It doesn't kill the creative process or the will to create. It just kills the ability for one to controll how the product will be distributed. The big problem is that the business model is based on the distribution process and not on the creation process. When creating information, nowadays, you either keep it to yourself and, maybe, a few trusted ones (meaning private information and privacy), or you give it to everyone else who wants it. There is no middle term. Paying for information makes sense only in a reward way.
  12. That's an absolutly normal folder and that's its normal behaviour. Windows woun't let you delete it. Use dos, linux, etc. It is put there by default with windows, dunno what for. Probably only one more hint of bloatware. Anyway, I've deleted it in the past and never noticed any consequences for doing it.
  13. Right to make a copy for my fried or to share it on the net with anyone who wants it. I don't see a problem with cloning it for personal use at all. It's only on the part when you start selling it and making money at the expense of the work of the other that I disagree with. If everyone can just do the same it's time for a new business model where the creators can gain something else from that process or where it's not the distribution of the product that grants the incoming but something else.
  14. Where I live we don't have that exception, at least not yet. A lot of shops post a not return policy or some sort but by law they are forced to accept any return untill 15 days have passed, no reason required. I've actually never tried to return anything that I can remember. Never had the need.
  15. Well, I already have the right to buy a cd and return it if I want to. I don't see a big difference with here. The potential for abuse already exists.
  16. It's impossible to controll an idea and it's impossible to controll information. The right to controll it just because you where the first to produce it or to register it is contrary to the nature of that same work. When I get some piece of information in same way I hade the right to do whatever I want with it. Specially because no one looses that same piece of information as a consequence of whatever I choose to do. Saying that the creator of a piece of information has the right to controll where it goes, who gets to benefict from it is the same as saying that the creator of a new car has the right of deciding in what roads that car can be driven or that the creator of a computer has the right of deciding what software can be runned on that computer and for what purposes. It doesn't make sense.
  17. Theoretical loss is no loss at all. What you describe I see as selfishness only. The artist only diserves to get compensated when he would effectively be compensated if it wheren't possible to get the work for free. When I download a piece of software, a movie or a music that I will not buy if I couldn't get it for free I'm not hurting anyone. It's only when I stop paying for it because I can get it for free instead that they get hurt by my actions. Or, much worse, if I make money at their expense selling copies of their work to others. I don't buy less stuff because I can get them for free. I buy what I would buy anyway and I get everything else that I want for free, stuff that I wouldn't buy anyway. No one's loosing money with me that way, no matter what they say. They are only being selfish because I'm using their work without any compensation. Well, they only diserve it if I would pay it anyway in case I couldn't get it for free. Well, it can't be monitored, controlled or imposed upon the masses. I'm sorry but it's the way of the future. Information creators just have to deal with it and adapt to the new ways. Information really wants to be free
  18. Just a very small little tiny bit!
  19. Damn, anonimity is expensive!! Anyway, I was thinking about the prepaid cards that you walk up to the counter and buy with live money! Probably there aren't many of those around! PO Boxes aren't really anonymous either. Not where I live anyway, I can't get one without some sort of identification.
  20. The thing is I don't consider it to be morally wrong at all. I do consider trying to avoid some one sharing something that can benefict society in general in any away to be morally wrong. The only difference I see between open source and closed source is not the one you mention but a difference between the content authors on one side and another. Open source creators share, closed source/proprieatary/paid content creators do not and fight that sharing. That's the difference I see. Anyway, this discussion doesn't seem apropriate in here. This is my opinion and nothing more than that. It is open to discussion if you feel the need for it, on some place probably more apropriate for it. Cheers
  21. That's not anonymous at all. The only way I can think of having an anonymous way of paying for something, not using cash directly is buying a pre-paid credit card with cash. And then, only if it doesn't involve shipping. You probably could use it in an anonymous way if you lie on your address and phone data and then transfer money there using a pre-paid credit car. But there probably is a risk in lying.
  22. Works fine over here!
  23. Piracy, when not for proffits, is all about sharing!
  24. Yup, that was it, and tx for the extra info. I didn't knew some of that stuff! Specially about the agreement.