[Medianews] Hackers attack website of Large Hadron Collider experiment
Hackers attack website of Large Hadron Collider experiment Daniel Bates UK Daily Mail Saturday, Sept 13, 2008 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1055477/Hackers-attack-website-Large-Hadron-Collider-experiment.html Hackers have infiltrated the computer systems of the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), the largest experiment in the world. A group calling themselves the Greek Security Team put a fake page on the facility’s website mocking those responsible for its IT systems as ‘a bunch of schoolkids’. But there was nothing more malicious in their attack and, in a rambling note written in Greek, they said they were not going to disrupt it further. The note read: ‘We’re pulling your pants down because we don’t want to see you running around naked looking to hide yourselves when the panic comes.’ The hack was all the more audacious because it began on Wednesday as the machine, which will smash protons together at near light speed, was being fired up and under the glare of the world’s media. No damage was done and the work of the scientists was not derailed, but the website - www.cmsmon.cern.ch - can no longer be accessed by the public as a result. *** * POST TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] * *** Medianews mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.etskywarn.net/mailman/listinfo/medianews
[Medianews] Gadgets That Collect Information Are Also Gathering Success
Gadgets That Collect Information Are Also Gathering Success By Walter Pincus Monday, September 15, 2008; Page A17 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/14/AR2008091402374.html?nav=rss_technology ISR has become the new silver bullet in counterinsurgency. It stands for intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, but it really means a series of new sensors and other electronic collection and analytic gadgets. It also includes the manned and unmanned airborne platforms from which they primarily operate. Last July, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates approved shifting more than $1 billion to ISR programs from other fiscal 2008 Pentagon budget accounts. In detailing the reprogramming request to congressional committees, Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon R. England wrote, These funds are being made available for ISR based on the view of the Secretary of Defense that the ISR effort is a higher priority and needs to be addressed at this time. Last week, without detailed explanation, the Senate Appropriations Defense Subcommittee announced that it had provided an additional $750 million to fund high priority intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance initiatives in the fiscal 2009 defense appropriations bill. For the best and most dramatic description of how useful ISR has become in Iraq, there is an article in a recent issue of the Joint Force Quarterly journal written by Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, who is scheduled to become the new commander of Multi-National Forces-Iraq tomorrow, and two of his subordinates, Lt. Col. Nichoel E. Brooks and Lt. Col. Francesco P. Mastracchio. Employment of ISR, according to the current counterinsurgency doctrine, sets the conditions for the initial success of the surge in Iraq, they wrote. Threats come not just from insurgents but also from militias who at any time might be working with or against each other, but most are consistently working against coalition forces. They attribute new successes in meeting these challenges to the recent increase of ISR, featuring full motion video assets. These are devices that can keep what they described as the unblinking eye on targets. There are enough that they can be placed at the level of combat brigades. Four years ago, there was no such video capability and limited top secret communications channels. Couriers were often used to synchronize intelligence databases at unit command posts. Now, they wrote, brigade combat team commanders have a platoon with unmanned aerial vehicles that can provide 18 hours of full motion video coverage and signal intelligence teams that can collect and analyze intelligence, as well as tap into classified national data resources. The result? On any given day, they wrote, a brigade combat team commander might be simultaneously focused on targeting a cell leader in an IED [improvised explosive device] network, providing security for a very important person convoy, monitoring a potentially violent demonstration, or responding to troops in contact -- to name only a few potential operations. That commander needs to have not only his own ISR assets but also the ability to call in those of higher commands, such as Predators, the larger, more costly, unmanned aircraft that have longer range and additional capabilities. The trio described a recent combat operation in which a variety of ISR assets were used to destroy an insurgent mortar team. Initially, a counterfire radar detected, tracked and determined the location of a firing point and sent that data to an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV). That UAV maintained contact through full motion video with the mortar site while information was sent to alert close support aircraft. The brigade tactical operations center brought in another UAV which, they wrote, provided clear evidence of mortar tubes being transferred to a second truck. The close air support plane destroyed the mortar team, and a UAV immediately verified its destruction. Success was attributed, they wrote, to the brigade commander being able to orchestrate FMV [full motion video] assets based on rapid feedback from intelligence analysts supporting the commander and tipping and cueing from multidiscipline intelligence sensors. Being Army officers, Odierno and his colleagues wrote that while close air support is an invaluable capability that brings large amounts of firepower to the fight in short order, they think that brigade commanders need more ISR rather than armed UAVs. ISR assets, they concluded, are some of the best tools our ground commanders have in breaking through that fog [of war]. *** * POST TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] * *** Medianews mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.etskywarn.net/mailman/listinfo/medianews
[Medianews] Why Do The Police Call In The RIAA To Investigate Potential Crimes?, from the that-doesn't-seem-right dept
Why Do The Police Call In The RIAA To Investigate Potential Crimes? from the that-doesn't-seem-right dept http://techdirt.com/articles/20080915/0212372271.shtml We've long known that the boundary between US law enforcement and the enforcement wings of certain lobbyist organizations like the RIAA is way too blurry, but TorrentFreak is raising some important questions about why the police will call in RIAA investigators on certain cases, such as one where a speeding stop in Illinois resulted in a cop calling in the RIAA after spindles of writeable DVDs and CDs was found in the car. While the RIAA and law enforcement have a history of working closely together (and many people go back and forth between the two), the RIAA is still a highly biased party here, and shouldn't be involved in investigations where it has a personal stake. While some politicians are trying to turn US law enforcement into the private police of the entertainment industry, that doesn't mean that police should just consider RIAA investigators their peers. So can anyone explain why RIAA investigators should be allowed to be involved in such cases and why no one's called US law enforcement on things like this before? *** * POST TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] * *** Medianews mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.etskywarn.net/mailman/listinfo/medianews
[Medianews] 4 Captivating Companies and What They Share
4 Captivating Companies and What They Share By James Ledbetter and Jacob Weisberg Sunday, September 14, 2008; Page F01 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/13/AR2008091300409.html?nav=rss_technology Ask yourself this question: Aside from the company where you or members of your family work, how many companies do you actually care about? We think that for a lot of us, there are only four: Starbucks, Apple, Google and Amazon -- call them the SAGA companies. Of course, reducing what's exciting about American business to SAGA is an exaggeration, but stay with us for a bit while we make a case that these four corporations represent a distinctive and distinctively American contribution to 21st-century capitalism. The SAGA companies do very different things and are of hugely different sizes: Google's market capitalization is about $158 billion; Starbucks is down to about $12 billion. Yet they share some remarkable traits. At the most basic level, each has transformed not only a specific commercial marketplace but also some important aspect of contemporary life -- computing and music for Apple, information and advertising for Google, coffee for Starbucks, books for Amazon. In doing so, each has had an appreciable impact on our daily routines, taken on a looming presence in popular culture, and often engendered an intensity of feeling more often associated with tastes in entertainment or political views. Together, they have created a new model of business innovation, culture and values. But what, really, do the SAGA companies have in common? Here's a start: They have a ubiquitous presence. Ubiquity doesn't necessarily make SAGA companies global market leaders; the worldwide proportion of computer users who own Apples is small and will probably never catch up to the formidable PC. But in many countries, iPod usage is surging, and all the world wants an iPhone. As for the others, Yahoo retains a slight global edge over Google in Web traffic, but that will probably not last much longer, and it is Google whose name is synonymous with finding information on the Web. (We figure that between us, we perform 100 Google searches a day and can easily go for weeks without using another search engine.) Amazon may not dominate e-commerce outside the United States as much as it does inside, but in few of the countries where Amazon operates Web sites is there a competitor that sells more books online. Starbucks manages to be everywhere and also across the street. · They reflect the comparative advantage of today's America . . . Dial back to the Fortune 500 list of 1958, and there's no mistaking the difference: a half-century ago, the iconic U.S. companies were about making and moving stuff: General Motors, Ford and Chrysler were all in the top 15. Oil companies and steel manufacturers filled the other top slots, along with General Electric, Eastman Kodak and the company still widely called in those days International Business Machines. Granted, SAGA companies do not rank that high on today's list, although they are often more profitable than firms that bring in more revenue. Nonetheless, they represent the dramatic shift away from domestic manufacturing and toward an idea-driven, consumer-focused, value-added economy. It is also not coincidental that all four companies are based on the West Coast, reflecting the shift in America's demographics and centers of innovation. · . . . yet they are genuinely global. Not very long ago, the undisputed symbols of American business abroad were Disney, McDonald's and Coca-Cola. Those brands remain tremendously powerful, but they have long felt as if they were monoliths imposed on other countries from abroad. (It's hardly surprising that McDonalds outlets are frequently the targets of anti-globalization protests.) By contrast, SAGA companies blend more easily into their environments by allowing international customers to explore their own tastes and preferences. Amazon could never get away with selling only American books and DVDs; an iPod has no obvious nationality, and despite some carping from European regulators, Google functions fairly seamlessly as an international Internet tool. · They are restless innovators. None of these companies made its business by being the first to add any new physical thing to peoples' lives: Starbucks did not invent coffee or even the coffee house; with the exception of the Kindle, almost every item available on Amazon is conceived of and produced off the Amazon campus; Apple didn't invent the computer, the cellphone or the MP3 player; and Google invented neither the search engine nor the paid search model. For the most part, SAGA companies don't invent; they perfect. The SAGA triumph is one of tweaks and packaging. That can sound lightweight, even derogatory, but it shouldn't be underestimated; remember that when Amazon started doing business in 1995, the vast
[Medianews] Newspapers say Google, Yahoo tie hurts competition
Newspapers say Google, Yahoo tie hurts competition http://news.yahoo.com/story//nm/20080915/tc_nm/yahoo_google_newspapers_dc_2 WASHINGTON (Reuters) – A deal by Google Inc (GOOG .O) and Yahoo Inc (YHOO .O) to share some advertising revenue will mean less money for newspapers and weaken Yahoo in the long run, the World Association of Newspapers said on Monday. The group, which represents 18,000 publications worldwide, criticized a deal struck in June in which Google will supply Yahoo with advertising services to run alongside Yahoo's own Web search system. Together the two companies have more than 80 percent of the search market. Competition between both these two search companies has provided a necessary check to any potential market abuses, and has helped to ensure that publishers and content generators are capable of earning an equitable and fair return on their content, the group said in a statement. W.A.N. strenuously opposes Google's attempt to take over a portion of Yahoo's content advertising and syndicated search business, the newspaper group said. The newspaper association expressed concern the deal was announced as publishers battled Google over copyright issues. *** * POST TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] * *** Medianews mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.etskywarn.net/mailman/listinfo/medianews
[Medianews] Report: MTV to Cancel TRL
Report: MTV to Cancel TRL Total Request Live launched on MTV in September 1998, to wrap with two-hour special in November. By BC Staff -- Broadcasting Cable, 9/15/2008 6:03:00 PM http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA6596363.html MTV’s era-defining video countdown show, Total Request Live, will end its decade-long run in November, according to an AP report Monday. Total Request Live According to the report, TRL executive producer Dave Sirulnick said the show, which launched in September 1998, will wrap with a two-hour special on a Saturday afternoon in November. Sirulnick added, however, that the show’s ending was not final, leaving the door open for a return in some form. Originally hosted by Carson Daly, TRL became a refuge for music videos as MTV expanded its alternative programming, and it helped to launch the careers of Britney Spears, Christina Aguilera, ‘NSync and other teen pop acts. *** * POST TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] * *** Medianews mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.etskywarn.net/mailman/listinfo/medianews
[Medianews] Brave New World of Digital Intimacy
Brave New World of Digital Intimacy By CLIVE THOMPSON The New York Times September 7, 2008 On Sept. 5, 2006, Mark Zuckerberg changed the way that Facebook worked, and in the process he inspired a revolt. Zuckerberg, a doe-eyed 24-year-old C.E.O., founded Facebook in his dorm room at Harvard two years earlier, and the site quickly amassed nine million users. By 2006, students were posting heaps of personal details onto their Facebook pages, including lists of their favorite TV shows, whether they were dating (and whom), what music they had in rotation and the various ad hoc groups they had joined (like Sex and the City Lovers). All day long, they'd post status notes explaining their moods - hating Monday, skipping class b/c i'm hung over. After each party, they'd stagger home to the dorm and upload pictures of the soused revelry, and spend the morning after commenting on how wasted everybody looked. Facebook became the de facto public commons - the way students found out what everyone around them was like and what he or she was doing. But Zuckerberg knew Facebook had one major problem: It required a lot of active surfing on the part of its users. Sure, every day your Facebook friends would update their profiles with some new tidbits; it might even be something particularly juicy, like changing their relationship status to single when they got dumped. But unless you visited each friend's page every day, it might be days or weeks before you noticed the news, or you might miss it entirely. Browsing Facebook was like constantly poking your head into someone's room to see how she was doing. It took work and forethought. In a sense, this gave Facebook an inherent, built-in level of privacy, simply because if you had 200 friends on the site - a fairly typical number - there weren't enough hours in the day to keep tabs on every friend all the time. ... http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/07/magazine/07awareness-t.html?partner=rssuserlandemc=rsspagewanted=all *** * POST TO [EMAIL PROTECTED] * *** Medianews mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.etskywarn.net/mailman/listinfo/medianews
