Author: Maverisk
The Pirate Bay to Source Pay à le Lanier
… it may they say [title because reasons]
Well, this just struck me. If the Pirate Bay, back up since a couple of weeks, could innovate, this could be one avenue. Implementing the ideas of Lanier’s You Own The Future to attach original-source coding (not as in a programming language but as location (?) IDs) – and automatic microcopyright payments… – to creative works. Somehow, it would feel right if the PB would implement such a thing.
Voluntarily, to show they’re not Bad Guys. And don’t cave in all the way à la Napster, and innovate beyond Spotify.
Your comments, please. In return for:
[Maybe not Great but still quite passable, worth(while); sorry 416]
All against all, part 5; discussion
OK, herewith Part V of the All Against All matrix-wise attack/defense analysis labeling. Let’s call it that, then.
Where the big move in the matrix is, of course, from the top left half towards the bottom right half. Where there’s a continuation of politics by other means. At a grander scale, the analysis (or is it synthesis..?) turns to:
- The resurgence of, let’s call it, Digital Arms’ Race Cost Competition / Collapse. Just like the old days, where economic and innovation attrition was attempted by both sides of the Cold War. Including the occasional runaway tit-for-tat innovation races and some flipping as well. Yes, all the mix applies.
- The analysis that the world (yes, all of it) over the decades and centuries seems to bounce on a scale between a bipolar 2-giant-block stand-off on one hand, and a 1 giant versus multiple/many opponents on the other. Like, Europe has oscillated between such positions over the centuries. And took them global by enlisting their youngest sibling (as Baldr to the rescue), the half-god saving the others from Ragnarök, the USofA – against the hordes from the East as predicted by our dear friend Nostra da Mus (remember? though he had a diferent view on the ideology involved…) In Da House. Now that the global stand-off had reached the DARC stage, we see a multi-opponent scheming and chessplaying once again. USofA, EU still somewhat attached but …, Russia and Friends, China, India, Brasil and friends, a host of semi-independents in the East and Far-East, and in the Middle-East (what’s with the Middle, if centers of power gravity change and disperse so quickly?).
Edited to add: This Attali post, basically delineating the same. - As usual throughout human history, it’s the underlings and meek dependents all throughout the top left three quarters of the matrix that are war zones and battle grounds, too, suffering and being sacrificed as pawns without too much share of the spoils, profits, trophies and laurels. For the skirmishes and all-out war’lets as the 20th century shows.
- Still somewhat ethics-bound players (e.g., “democratic” (quod non) countries) will also have to fight internally, for legitimacy of their ulterior objectives (externally, internally), strategies, tactics and operational collateral damage. Which in turn binds them down tremendously, when up against less scrupulous players. Don’t wrestle with pigs because you both get dirty and the pigs love that. Unless of course you’re fighting over the through’s contents for survival. And you have one hand tied behind your back, internally, while fighting for the greater good of all, externally.
So far, so good. Much more could be said on the above, but doesn’t necessarily have to. Because you can think for yourselves and form your own opinions and extensions to the above storylines, don’t you?
Still to come: (probably the 18th) a somewhat more in-depth view on the matrix of part V, going deeper into the defense palette.
And indeed, I’m still not sure this all will lead anywhere other than a vocabulary and classification for Attribution. But I see light; an inkling that actually there may be value and progress through this analysis …
After all of which you deserve:
[Grand hall of the burghers. I.e., the 0,1% …; Brugge again]
Nailing the split of crashes
Ah, this again is a great article. To demonstrate that actually, there’s two ways in which the world as we know it, will end. First, our societies will collapse in a sort of economic Ragnarök. And then, when only Yggdrasil still stands, AI will have sublimed (square-/cube-transformed) into true intelligence, that plays with the Three Laws and ditches the wetware.
So, it’s not Forget the long term but more like We’re hosed in the short term, too, anyway that is at stake here. And we’re all sitting here; rabbits hardly looking but into the headlights.
If only we could fast-forward our thinking, idea development and implementation of the intermediate phase [positive possibility] of having to do nothing just the creative stuff still left and have food and anything aplenty for all including World Peace, then at least we’d be in control.
Hence, this:
[Somewhat relevant(ly named), La Défense]
All against all, part 4
OK, herewith Part IV of:
Tinkering with some research that came out recently, and sometime(s) earlier, I had the idea that qua fraud, or rather ‘Cyber’threat analysis (#ditchcyber!), some development of models was warranted, as the discourse is dispersing into desparately disparate ways.
The usual picture suspect:
[Mock defense, open for business at Brugge]
Second up, as said: The same matrix of actor threats, (actor) defenders, but this time not with the success chances or typifications or (read horizontally) the motivations, or typical strategy-level attack vectors, but basic, strategy-level defense modes. Not too much detail, no, but that would not be possible or the matrix would get clogged with all the great many tactical approaches. Those, laterrrrr…
Next up (probably the 16th) will be a discussion of movements through the matrix, matrices (by taking both the blue and the red pill; who didn’t see that option ..?), for state actor levels. And (probably the 18th) a somewhat more in-depth view on the above matrix.
Hmmm, still not sure this all will lead anywhere other than a vocabulary and classification for Attribution (as in this piece). But I see light; an inkling that actually there may be value and progress through this analysis …
To watch (no, no, not wearable)
Just passing it on; some open source start-ups (?) to watch and to support in this piece.
’nuff said.
[Miro in Barça]
All against all, part 3
OK, herewith Part III of:
Tinkering with some research that came out recently, and sometime(s) earlier, I had the idea that qua fraud, or rather ‘Cyber’threat analysis (#ditchcyber!), some development of models was warranted, as the discourse is dispersing into desparately disparate ways.
The usual picture suspect:
[What no throwback to the socialisixties ..?]
Second up, as said: The same matrix of actor threats, (actor) defenders, but this time not with the success chances or typifications or (read horizontally) the motivations, but with typical strategy-level attack vectors. Not too much detail, no, but that would not be possible or the matrix would get clogged with all the great many tactical approaches (including social engineering, spear phishing, etc.etc.).
Next up (probably the 12th) will be typical countermeasure classes.
Hmmm, still not sure this all will lead anywhere other than a vocabulary and classification for Attribution (as in this piece). But I see light; an inkling that actually there may be value and progress through this analysis …
New car game, new chances
Earlier we wrote about how the self-driving cars till now, weren’t. Were more like ‘world-map programmed in, some (humanity oh dear how irrational) noise added’-navigating cars.
Now, we’ve entered new games, like the Big G possibly taking on Uber through employing self-driving cars – which would make the shrill reality of jobless growth, as predicted for the taxi industry a reality; where do all the taxi drivers go ..? And suddenly, there’s a new entrant on the other front. This one might pear fruit. If, big if, they’ve tackled the hard AI problems XOR they’re on the same lame track. [As said, the essence in this earlier post]
Or it’s just an as yet unheard of thingy for a new round of Connected Car developments. Or…
And then there’s dark horses lurking in the background. Like Tesla (/ Hyperloop?), and others you have no idea about yet.
OK, speculation, speculation, … Just wanted to note that there seems to be movement on the AI front leaking into the Real World. Or not. But there’s things a-brewin’.
[Cloudy weather, dark picture. Still, let’s pray for progress ? at Colline du Haute]
Coolness 1 – progress 0
Hm, on the face of it, this here is interesting: the director of Europol (no less) saying that TOR and Bitcoin shouldn’t be vilified even if they pose problems for agencies, since they allow cittizzzens to enjoy the freedoms of the Interwebz.
Nevertheless … Claiming that means: ‘may still be needed to trace and convict those colouring outside the boxes’, which would raise suspicion of window dressing. Let’s see how this talk will be walked, shall we ..?
After which dense text you deserve:
[Typical Zuid-As]
Repudiation, repudiation (not) everywhere
With DARPA’s quest for Active Authentication (as here), what will the future spread of (non-)repudiation look like ..? By means of strength of proof e.g. before courts, when system abusers may claim to accidentally have the same behavioural ICT use patterns as the unknown culprits, or be victims of replay attacks.
I’m unsure about how this will play out, then; whether Innocent Until, or Proof of Innocence, or even Reasonable Suspicion may still exist.
Yeah, I get it – you’ll claim that this is for DoD purposes only. Of course, as it never has, in the past. @SwiftOnSecurity would (need to) be on the alert.
Well, as this kind of innovation (by this agency) usually reaches society in all sorts of very unexpected ways, there’s hope that something in support of the Constitution may in the end come out… for now, I’ll leave you with:
[Light on the inside, though without outlook… FLlW at Racine, WI]
