What is Digg?Sponsored by HowLifeWorks
How to Make Your PC as Fast as the Day You Bought It view!
howlifeworks.com - What's the fastest way to restore a computer to its original blazing glory
45 Comments
- milomilomilo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+88When our schools, that teach our children are worried that the government may have a difficult time spying on us and so hold up our progress, it's a sure sign that this country is going to hell in a hand basket.
Whats next, Don't block your door with things just in case there is an FBI raid on your home? You wouldn't want them tripping on the way in. - walterd93, on 10/12/2007, -5/+28Damn bush and his rules...:(.
- gothicx00, on 10/12/2007, -1/+22Good lord.....
Grow some balls Bowdoin and fix it *when* it's broken, not before it isn't broken yet. - 4degrees, on 10/12/2007, -1/+20you don't want to block the door when they come raid you. They might trip, hurt themselves and you would have a lawsuit on your hands...
- interiot, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15Advocating the encryption of communications is unpatriotic, citizen.
- UserAgent, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13Any WiFi network is automatically wiretap-ready.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12When is the FBI going to become wiretap ready so we the people can make sure they are doing what we pay them to do?
- marnaq, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12Except that there are no *wires* to tap in a wifi.
Anyways... the solution is spelled SSL. It's about time for everyone to adopt to it. Internet isn't as safe as it used to be. - PAStheLoD, on 10/12/2007, -4/+15I'd register 100 accounts just to digg this comment a little ..
- rhawk301, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9Are you kidding me? I show my kids how to disarm my alarm system, and booby traps. We should NEVER need to fear our government. If that ever happens, we are in deep trouble...oh, wait...damn. Start reading our we're all screwed!
- sh0k, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Before you comment on this, just think of the implications: we have to stifle progress so that our government can better surveille us.
To what greater good? For what purpose, other than to make sure that if the government ever *does* need to totally monitor all your coms, they can do so without any problem? Why the hell do my dollars go towards establishing public surveillance, when they could be spent educating the public? When did protection from its own citizens become more important to the government than progress?
I didn't used to think this way, but a citizen can only take so much before they decide to either rebel or comply. I'm making it my goal to disrupt/petition against/fight against any invasive, unneeded, unwarranted spying programs the government might initiate around my town. Ever seen the pictures of the mangled road cameras in Britain?
Of course, even saying such things might well get you into trouble, nowadays.
^_^ - pyrotherm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7This is total BS, If i were them, i would preceed with thier great project, and totally disregard the wiretapping compliance crap. I mean, we all know the government has the tools and the know-how to identify any of us at any time, and if they can't, they'll just make it up anyways!
- lowerlogic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7I'm sad to hear that routers have not yet been invented at Bowdoin college :(.
- Mambo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Apparently not you.
- ddales, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Borked title! I thought the wire-tapping access was actually slowing the Kbps until I read the article. Now that I see that it's slowing the implementation of the project, I'm even more pissed off.
- themarq, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6here's the rest of the article, to save you a click:
There's been a long debate going over whether or not CALEA wire-tapping rules should apply to internet access, and an FCC ruling last year on the subject didn't create any separate rules for colleges and universities. Some believe that if the network is for students and faculty only, it doesn't need to follow the wiretapping rules -- but others aren't so sure. Either way, this particular network has been put on hold until someone from the FCC explains to the CIO at Bowdoin just what the requirements are when it comes to wiretapping compliance. - 4degrees, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9F the FBI.
federal bureau of incompetence more like... - rhawk301, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Most of the FBI and Law Enforcement are simply following pre-aligned orders. Unfortunately they breed mostly "yes sir" types, so there is no room for free thinkers. Power to free speech.
- MonkeyFarts, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3You know, before you open your mouth you should really take a gander at a little thing called the Constitution of the United States of America. Don't know where to look? Start here:
http://wethepeople.17.forumer.com/index.php?c=1&sid=d2d709777c6984e45cb415419235c676
That's the complete Constitution, the Amendments, and the Declaration of Independence. Since you have obviously never read any of them, and quite possibly have never even heard of any of them, I would strongly recommend you read them immediately.
Pay especially close attention to the Fourth Amendment. Since you seem rather incompetent, allow me to paste what it says right here so that there's absolutely no chance that you will miss it. It says,"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." - KeirGordon, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5I thought they were supposed to have to 'tap into wires' for a wiretap.... If we are doing their job for them then I hope we cut their budget accordingly.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Fear - Uncertainty - Doubt: the favorite tool of those who choose to slowly erode the lives of many.
Rojo - keimel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3It's not a question of balls, but a question of who wants to pay the legal costs of telling the government "BS!" when they start arresting people for 'non compliance' to the mystery law.
- osc1882, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2What the ***** is going on?
It seems that over night the goverment now watches every min of my life.
I'm Pretty sure they have a cam in my bath room so they can watch me take a crap.
And I'm pretty sure they have mics on all of my friends so they can record our most private talks at 3 am.
We are in some deep *****. - Amir5831, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Welcome to Police States of America. Look what unconditional support for maniacs as your head of state did to your democracy and freedom. Well done Americans.
- keimel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2They are planning to go through with the project, they're just not opening it up to the public.Yet.
- lancefisher, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Actually most the stories I read are not about the technical problems with municipal WiFi, but the bureaucratic problems.
- I82Much, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3As a student at Bowdoin college, I have a somewhat vested interest in the wifi network. As it is, the coverage is spotty at best, even in the brand new dorm I was in last year. The solution was to go wired, but with three of us in a room and only 2 ethernet jacks, it left one out in the cold
- keimel, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Might want to suggest to your help desk where the coverage might be less than optimal. Bitching about it in Digg won't fix it. Bitching about it to someone at the school might. Just bitching to your roommate only annoys your roommate.
- zbeast, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Wow thats amazing.
I say if they want to tap it they have to put up the moeny for the "feature". - LowandSilent, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Yes, damn Bush...but, these rules have been around since before him. So, damning him for the reason of this story isn't a valid point.
- williamdyer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3***** 'em if they don't have enough brains to figure out they have become the enemy.
- geronimo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"is ANYONE on digg at an intelligence level over 12 years of age?"
That's ironic. - mleaman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It's the "making it available to the downtown public" option that is being affected, not the wifi for Bowdoin's private use. Basically, no free wifi for the general public.
- JonForTheWin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Wow, the FBI is way behind the times seeing how WiFi networks are the easiest to spy on.
- Muddle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The FBI knows exactly how to tap into a WiFi network, in fact you can find their own explicit instructions on how to do so on-line including what tools they use. The problem here is the federal government wants everyone else, but themselves to pay for the equipment such as backup drives, provide a structure and electricity to house and power the equipment, on-site expertise, time involved and be responsible for the taps.
The real story here is, this is just another unfunded mandate. - faskill, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Wow, I feel rather uneducated. I just read about the CALEA for the first time and am rather annoyed with it's inception. As for the article, someone above me said it best, "...fix it *when* it's broken, not before it isn't broken yet."
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The word is switch. Hubs are outdated technology.
- osbjmg, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I see what you're saying, but it usually involves routing traffic through a few known points where sniffers or probes can be placed for SPAN (mirroring) sessions to redirect copies of packets to. You would also need a way to identify each address to a student/faculty member.
- gothicx00, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Woah, wait, it's not even clear cut if the law even applies to students and faculty. So what i was saying was build the damn network and when and if somebody tells you that it doesn't comply with a poorly written, opaquely defined law, then do what it takes to become in compliance.
It's sad that a university is walking on eggshells about something that very well may not apply to them. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1It didn't slow down my university (Ball State) - It received the nations top wireless campus by Intel Corporation.
http://www.bsu.edu/news/article/0,1370,7273-850-37100,00.html - protogenxl, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Today's Word is HUB.
Can you say HUB?
A HUB is an electronic device that splits one Ethernet Connection into Several Ethernet connections. You can purchase a HUB at any Electronics Store for less than twenty dollars. - HanSolo69, on 10/12/2007, -6/+2I was wondering why nobody was Digging my post of this...
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+0Hey you stupid *****...you should not be alive. Seriously. Your body is not worht anything. Becuase your braing does not work.
Wiretapping is legal, and has been for decades. It would be ***** asinine to not extend it to any new form of commication that is invented.
Seriouslky...do everyone in your life a favor and end your life. No one wants you on this earth anymore. You mom was saying that she can't wait for the day she can piss on your grave. - Firemanjoe, on 10/12/2007, -6/+0This is just ridiculous! Why can't the gov just leave us alone! I mean, come on.....
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -8/+0The hypocrisy of digg users never ceases to amaze me. The 12 year old mentality here allows you to make 500,000 "The internet is a bunch of tubes" jokes, even though it ceased to be funny 499,999 times ago. Yet when a law is passed that conintues a LONG existing valid law into 21st century communication...AS IT SHOULD...you act like it is horrible and that the laws should not advance with technology.
Yeah! Let's allow criminals to use the internet for their illegla communications without ANY fear of getting caught because you stupid worthless ***** think that the law should stay in the 1980s. And while we are at it, show how juvenil and worhtless you are by taking shots at Bush.
Seriously...is ANYONE on digg at an intelligence level over 12 years of age?
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is