hobbyboy

Member
  • Content Count

    87
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About hobbyboy

  • Rank
    Member
  1. hobbyboy

    HELP! Somebody hacked into my computer

    One possibility is a malicious link in the website(s) you are viewing. Clicking a malicious link may install something on your computer which can do harm. AV software may not necessarily catch it. Read the CERT® Advisory CA-2000-02 "Malicious HTML Tags Embedded in Client Web Requests" at http://www.cert.org/advisories/CA-2000-02.html. Unfortunately there is no ironclad way of protecting yourself from malicious links other than not clicking any link.
  2. hobbyboy

    Broadband routers

    I find that all home user routers eventually "give up the ghost" after a year or two. I have a cable broadband connection with an SMC 7008ABR, an 8-port router. My first one failed after 8 months, the second one just failed now after 1 year. Up until then they functioned fine, with the occasional reset. I guess at the price point for home routers that's what you can expect. I drool after the Cisco routers (see the review on the Cisco 806 router at http://www.modemhelp.org/reviews/august2002.html). At least their tech support is in the US, not India (SMC) or the Philippines (Linksys), but of course they are 4X the price. One suggestion to ameliorate router failure is that you have two routers, the first one as your main router and the second one as a spare, and using the spare router as a "switch" for the main router until the main router fails.
  3. hobbyboy

    Lite-On Drives

    I have a Sony DRU-510A (internal DVD/CD-RW ) and it is completely silent. You have to put your ear physically on the drive to hear it. See the Sony URL here for the DRU-510A Unfortunately the Sony Drive is not yet supported by Easy CD Creator. See the Easy CD Creator list for Sony supported drives here I generally like all Plextor's stuff. However they have problems with DVD X Copy Software. See the FAQ on this at: http://support.321studios.com/faq/faqsuppo...1154&CatID=9999. Bottom Line on DRU-510A: mixed bag but totally silent drive and burns every current standard.
  4. hobbyboy

    Enough Memory for XP ?

    The site you reference for overclockersclub may be a "cut and paste" site which ripped off the Black Viper Web site (according to Black Viper). The Black Viper Web site states this at http://www.blackviper.com/WinXP/overclockersclub.htm.
  5. hobbyboy

    RIAA philosophical question

    And I don't have to go through a judge to get this personal info. Excellent.
  6. hobbyboy

    RIAA philosophical question

    Oops - on anyone they want You don't have to change it. It is exactly what will happen. Any person that holds a copyright would be eligible to do so - according to an interview in the german c't magazine with Sarah Deutsch from Verizon. It is obvious that ISP wouldn't like anything like that to happen. They would have to answer thousands of requests from every person that claims that someone "distributes" their copyrighted material. That's why Verizon will go to the Supreme Court if they have to. cya ralf Very good point. My typo correction from "I" to "they" was not necessary, since "I" can use DMCA for my own purposes by claiming copyright infringement when somebody takes info from my website. I can then get personal ISP info on anyone who copies my web site. Stalkers will love this one.
  7. hobbyboy

    RIAA philosophical question

    Oops - on anyone they want
  8. hobbyboy

    RIAA philosophical question

    Yes - the DCMA law seems to be very far reaching - especially that the RIAA does not need to go through a judge to get information which would normally require a search warrant. They simply have to ask the ISP for info on anyone I want. To me it is unprecedented - it seems like "unreasonable search and seizure," something forbidden by the US constitution (until now).
  9. hobbyboy

    RIAA philosophical question

    Undoubtedly it is. They are seeking to maximize their control/profits. It will be interesting how the court battles evolve. In my hypothetical question what I meant was that if a troublemaker sent an encrypted music file to another person with the intent of "framing" them, similar to planting stolen property in someone’s house, would the person being framed be technically guilty of breaking the DCMA law simply by virtue of having a illegal music file in their possession, even if they had no knowledge they had the file (because the music file was encrypted) - i.e. is the DCMA law that powerful?
  10. hobbyboy

    I need help with XP

    Won't you have an issue with WPA activation occurring when you move the installation to another computer?
  11. I have a philosophical question for the Storagereview Community regarding file-sharing. Suppose I send an email with an attachment to someone. The attachment is encrypted and the receiver has no way of knowing what it is. It turns out that the encrypted file is a (gasp!) pirated music file. I then send the password for this encrypted file to my buddy at the RIAA, and report the receiver of the email as a person having a pirated song. The RIAA then checks the email receiver's ISP's logs and sees that this person did in fact receive the encrypted file. So the person receiving the email is in possession of an illegal music file without even knowing it. And the RIAA considers suing them for $150,000 for the song. Question 1: Can they be prosecuted under DCMA? Question 2: Should the DCMA be so powerful as to allow such a prosecution even if a person doesn't know they are in possession of an illegal file?
  12. hobbyboy

    RIAA suing people

    How far the RIAA can go with regard to using the DCMA against copyright violators is mostly dependent on how the courts interpret the "reach" of DCMA. In the words of a lawyer, "Congress writes the laws, but the courts tell them what the law means." Currently, is a mixed bag with regard to judicial findings. The current major judicial findings are: 07/00 - Napster shut by Federal Judge decision 12/02 - Aimster (Madster) shut down by Federal Judge. Aimster argued that encrypting it's network relieved it of liability (Appeal lost by Aimster on 6/30/03, the court ruling that encryption in Aimster is "willful neglect") 04/03 - Grokster and Streamcast (parent of the Morpheus software) declared legal by Federal Judge. Federal judge uses a 1984 Supreme Court ruling on the Sony Betamax which established the concept of "substantial non-infringing use." The issue of what will ultimately become of file-sharing is headed to the Supreme Court. The high court will probably hold that "Napster-like" file-sharing is illegal, but with other forms of file-sharing systems to shut them down you have to prove the file-sharing system itself is "substantially" and "willfully" contributing to a conscious attempt to promulgate illegal file sharing. Some file-sharing technologies will probably be able to escape this type of "litmus test" by claiming a "substantial non-infringing use."
  13. hobbyboy

    RIAA suing people

    How far the RIAA can go with regard to using the DCMA against copyright violators is mostly dependent on how the courts interpret the "reach" of DCMA. In the words of a lawyer, "Congress writes the laws, but the courts tell them what the law means." Currently, is a mixed bag with regard to judical findings. The current major judicial findings are: 12/01 - Napster shut by Federal Judge decision 12/02 - Aimster (Madster) shut down by Federal Judge. Aimster argued that encrypting it's network relieved it of liability 6/30/03 - Aimster appeal lost - Ruling that encryption in Aimster is "willful neglect" 04/03 - Grokster and Streamcast (parent of the Morpheus software)
  14. hobbyboy

    RIAA suing people

    Then they can simply be firewalled, even as they enter the U.S. As China for details... FS Not in the US. To get a court order to block an IP address/computer you would have to show a judge that copyrighted files are coming from that particular IP address/computer. The network is designed so that files appearing to come from a particular IP address may actually be coming from another IP address and simply passing through the computer in question. Hence the network offers anonymity in this sense. And since you cannot prove which computer has the illegal files, you are faced with shutting down every computer on the Freenet network (any one of which may be the one actually having the file) to stop the file transfer. The law in most civilized countries requires the guilty party to be identified rather than to arrest everybody who just might be guilty. Shutting down everybody to catch the guilty party is overly broad and has been struck down time and time again by the US Supreme Court. That would be like law enforcement deciding that since a black male committed a robbery, simply arrest all black males.