Forum: Author Hangout

To me this announcing new chapters now on Patreon while he hasn't posted the first chapter here on SOL is shady. Once he has posted the first chapter here it's – for me – okay if he announces the new chapter available on SOL and reminds the reader what chapter is actual on Patreon.

The caveat to that is the delay between chapters posted here on SoL. If the posting rate is one a year on SoL but more frequently on a pay site, (as is the case with a certain author) then blogging about offsite updates isn't or shouldn't be acceptable.

A blog post announcing a new story or chapter should ONLY apply to that posted to SoL and NOT to work posted elsewhere.

Not my opinion, the rules specifically state that 'teasers' are forbidden. A blog entry about an offside update is by definition a tease.

If the posting rate is one a year on SoL but more frequently on a pay site, (as is the case with a certain author) then blogging about offsite updates isn't or shouldn't be acceptable.

Right, with one exception: When posting the next chapter here and s/he announces this new (for SoL) chapter in a blog post, it should be allowed to tell the reader which chapter is the newest on the pay site.
Concerning the teaser: if his posting rate on SOL is once a year and after one year there are already 50+ chapters on the pay site then it's obviously a teaser. With the posting rate on SOL the now actual chapter on the pay site would be uploaded to SOL in about 50 years!
But if the ratio is 2:1 (2 chapters on the pay site to 1 chapter on SOL) and the rate is once a week you can't earnestly call it a teaser.

HM.

Some post weekly, others post weakly.

I can't earnestly call anything, as I'm not Ernest. :)

(Though I am currently close to water)

If you eat a big meal, you could be joyful and go visit your friend Joice again. :)

If you eat a big meal, you could be joyful and go visit your friend Joice again. :)

I'd rather be 'johere' ....

Think about it :)

A couple of story chapters I read today mentioned in their end notes that later chapters were available on Patreon. I have no problem with that - it seems a sensible way to advertise without rubbing SOL readers' noses in it.

First, thanks for reading!

As I'm implying, I like doing this myself. My Friday updates are generally only a short ways ahead on Patreon. In addition the plan going forth is to have a Tuesday update that comes out here only after the full story is on Patreon. Alerting my readers that they can get a full 55 000 word story today while putting out chapters weekly seems fair.

Putting something up exclusively on Patreon and then blogging about it on SOL with nothing available on SOL seems skeezy.

I don't understand your reasoning. Patreon readers can surely find that out via Patreon, and SOL readers don't need to know.

A couple of story chapters I read today mentioned in their end notes that later chapters were available on Patreon. I have no problem with that - it seems a sensible way to advertise without rubbing SOL readers' noses in it.

You really believe "SOL readers don't need to know."?

I would like to know if the new book I didn't start to read because of the long intervals between posts here on SOL is already fully available on a pay site. If I really liked the previous book I will consider to pay for the new one. (Why? Read on.)

And NO I don't start reading incomplete books ore completed books with posting intervals of one week or more!

I'm 72 now and I was never able to concurrently read more than three books. With posting intervals of one week (or longer) I would have to read eight or more stories concurrently and the story lines would get mixed up in my brain!

Another problem I have: I tend to lose interest in a series of stories if I have to wait years for the next book in the series. Happened with Weber's Honor Harrington, Wen Spencer's Elfhome, and some others. So I'll pay for the next book if the price is reasonable instead of waiting until it's released here on SOL.

HM.
ETA: I wouldn't lose interest if all books are already published. (I've read all twenty novels of Bernard Cornwell's Sharpe saga).

report the blog post and circumstances to Lazeez and let him deal with it.

I would be somewhat surprised if Lazeez was not aware of this thread, however, the point of the post was to invite the thoughts of others before making an official 'bitch' about it. Who knows, my opinion might be a majority of one...

I don't know the author concerned, but if the blog entry has a non-SoL URL in it then the blog entry shouldn't be showing on the home page due to the current filtering system.

Correct. But.

If one was to post a blog entry with the URL which didn't appear on the home page, then later post to announce the new chapter and point readers at the earlier blog post to get the URL...

Which is mostly what caught my attention, knowingly subverting the filter for offsite URLs in such a way is I think taking the piss, certainly not an innocent mistake.

Perhaps a compromise might be that every blog post mentioning patreon is omitted from SOL's home page.

Wouldn't work in this case. He deliberately doesn't name the other site but refers to an earlier blog post.
I cited from this earlier post in my first answer to joyR's posting.

BTW, his blog post shows no longer on SOL's home page.

HM.

I like the author concerned and would be very disappointed if the final outcome were to be the deletion of his stories from SOL.

I would presume the deletion of all of an authors stories would only be as a result of repeated flouting of the site rules.

It should not matter if the author is the most popular on the site, or the most awful, Lazeez goes far out of his way to cater to everyones needs and tastes, authors and readers, so it is not unreasonable to require everyone to abide by the site rules, both in letter and spirit.

$0.02

Actually I was thinking an author might delete their own stories if they felt a ban on their adverts wasn't fair. We've seen pouty authors flounce off before.

It's called Stories on Line, not Kindergarten on Line.

Nevertheless, admin has an inenviable task trying to balance the needs of authors versus protecting the site and its readers against exploitation.

Presuming that the concept of heaven and hell exist, no admin has ever been sent to hell for the simple reason that nothing in the land of eternal damnation is even remotely close to the average day in the life of an admin.

:)

I was going to post the SysAdmin DNS joke, but it might take up to 36 hours for all of you to get it...

Although, SOL's TTL used to be 300 like scifistories.

That would account for the longer propagation times as some ISPs will ignore such a short TTL setting and use their own instead, which can be much longer.

All of which you doubtless know, but hey!! I'm not just blonde... :)

Nobody should be using their ISPs DNS except as a last resort. This will help you pick the best one:

We're also at a point where you probably should use a VPN with exit nodes in countries which are not part of 'Five Eyes'.

Might I suggest that if you offer opinions like these you also include enough information or links so that those who don't understand what the heck you are talking about could learn enough to understand?

Obviously doing so is a moot point as many people simply don't care or can't be bothered. Open the box, charge the device, go. Get a friend/relative/etc to set up your email.

I would suggest that the majority of users are not tech savvy, so whilst your suggestions are valid, in the majority of cases it's simply not going to happen.

It is a little like website design, most think that it is important to have the latest whistles and bells, yet as of 2013, 9.4 million Americans were still using dial-up. To them a site that loads fast is much better than one that looks great after loading for ten minutes.

Use a good DNS server, stick to a reliable VPN, connect to it via another VPN, write a script to wash your emails through PGP etc ten times. But is that really necessary to send your cookie recipe to a friend?

It is not hard to send a file over the net that no 'eyes' can decipher, that won't stop them knowing it is undecipherable and wondering what you are hiding. Maybe they just want your recipe for double chocolate cookies..?

Installing good locks and a reliable alarm system in your home makes perfect sense. Adding a load of obvious security measures is asking for a break in, either because you must be protecting something worth stealing, or because some agency decides you are up to no good.

In the UK many vans have a sticker that says "No tools stored in this vehicle overnight". Great idea except it actually means, "There are tools in this vehicle during the day".

/rant

Actually, this is exactly the opposite of good security practice. If you only encrypt 'important' stuff, you are telling the bad guys (whoever they are - government, criminals, government criminals) exactly where to look.

I didn't suggest selective use.

3) Encrypt everything (solved by using HTTPS and a VPN).

If you actually believe that statement then excuse me whilst I die laughing.

If I use a VPN, all traffic leaving my computer is encrypted. True statement.

First you suggested, "Encrypt everything".

Then you stated, "(solved by using HTTPS and a VPN)"

Which induces a good deal of humour. For which I thank you. I enjoy a good laugh. :)

Why?

Because following your advice has the effect of taking plain text and encrypting it only by HTTPS. Which sounds great unless you know a little more, like at what point on its travels it gets unencrypted...

So, to reach the level of security YOU suggest is necessary, your data must be encrypted before you send it by HTTPS, that way it arrives still encrypted and thus secure. (How secure depends on the encryption used)

Of course I don't expect you to take my word for that, so how about an independent viewpoint?

If I then want to further protect it at the far endpoint, I can encrypt it with PGP or something similar. But I was talking about transport.

Transport... Ok, so you go to the trouble of having your naked photo or whatever sent by secure courier to your beau, thus it's safe because you used a secure courier.. Upon arriving at the destination the courier removes the photo from his case, holds it up to the receptionist and informs her he has to deliver it to your beau... Yep, that's secure...

Of course it was as you say, perfectly secure during transport. (giggle)

Which is why I stated that HTTPS is not secure, which curiously you agree to in the above quote. If you had placed the photo in an envelope (PGP) neither the courier nor the receptionist would have seen it.

How is HTTPS not secure? Other than the user explicitly trusting an SSL proxy, which you know, requires explicit user action and installing the proxy's certificate, how is the https protocol not secure?

Ok, first off, anyone can set up a HTTPS site, anyone. Setting up a supposedly secure site is a well used phishing tool.

Second, HTTPS is not security, it is privacy. Which matters in the context under discussion.

As an example, let's use a file sent by me to SoL, HTTPS makes the file private. So private that your server security will not recognise it as a threat. That allows me access to hack SoL. So, to prevent that, you arrange it so the file is decrypted from HTTPS before it passes security. Now, whilst SoL is probably safe, many, many sites are not, because in order to ensure my file is checked by their security, they decrypt it from HTTPS first, then scan it. Having the file decrypted 'outside' their security makes it vulnerable. (See the envelope analogy in previous post)

Because this off topic subject veered into what is and is not good security practise, my point was and is that relying solely on the HTTPS protocol is NOT sufficient to be secure and never was.

To be secure I need to encrypt the file, send it too you so you can decrypt it. If at any time in between it is decrypted then it isn't secure (or private). So, whilst HTTPS will in most cases be private, it will not be secure. Nor will it make the site secure just because it uses the HTTPS protocol.

In case you are not aware this might be of interest.

In case you are not aware this might be of interest.

Interesting read. I did know that HTTPS is about privacy, not security. What I didn't know was that it can become a security hole in itself if not properly followed with adequate security measures.

But to say 'https is not secure' is bullshit.

I'd phrase it as HTTPS ensures privacy, not security, as previously stated. As for SoL, I'd have been very surprised indeed if you had anything but a secure site.

So, insofar as it being 'private', yes HTTPS is as you reference it, secure.

Except. Last time I cause to check around, and that wasn't recent, there were half a dozen options for freeware that can decode HTTPS, one or more was JAVA based as I recall, I believe all or most used a MitM method. Since those were freely available and there were, so presumably are still, 'professional' options that do the same, I don't think it true to claim that HTTPS can ensure 100% private/secure.

Then there is another viewpoint. When PGP first went global the response from the agencies that found they couldn't access emails was immediate. Zimmermann was targeted in a criminal investigation by the US Government for not having a license to export munitions**. Now, twenty odd years later we have HTTPS which is being forced upon just about every site. Is it fair to say that the US Gov no longer cares about not being able to read that traffic? Or is HTTPS in fact readable...?

Does that affect day-to-day web use by the majority of users? Probably not. But if it can be read, it ain't 100% secure, is it?

**Note for those unaware of PGP history, at the time the US Gov considered any encryption over 40bit to be 'munitions' that could not be released outside the US without an export license. PGP started at 128bit. As to why encryption was lumped in with munitions...?? I have no idea, as far as I know, it has never been officially explained.

But when you use the phrase 'https is not secure' you're implying that it's useless and that's not true.

Only if you take that statement out of context. As previously, it allows privacy, it does not guarantee security, so I stand by what I posted. When discussing what it takes to be secure, HTTPS alone is not enough.

As to why encryption was lumped in with munitions...?? I have no idea, as far as I know, it has never been officially explained.

Two words: electronic warfare. And strong encryption is STILL covered by that law.

They've gone after US people/companies publishing designs for 3d printable plastic guns with that law.

They've gone after US people/companies publishing designs for 3d printable plastic guns with that law.

It's not just plastic guns they are going after. Some 3D metal printers that laser sinter alloys are having their patents yanked out of public and classified. The code, alloy, and the process.

It's not just plastic guns they are going after.

I didn't say they were going after plastic guns. They have charged people/companies under the munitions export law for making the printer control files available on line. Not guns, essentially, blueprints for making guns.

Blueprints and the means of producing them. I predict inside the next seven years, 3D printers of most stripes will end up a government licensed item. They can't allow the plebeians to actually create without their benevolent controls can they?

I predict inside the next seven years, 3D printers of most stripes will end up a government licensed item.

That would be like licensing blacksmiths because they might make swords. Since 3D printers are widespread and worldwide what is the point?

Licensing them now is not just closing the stable door after the horse has bolted, it's after the horse has died.

Continuing to going after the specific code is much more likely.

As a historical example, some of the machines used to build the original nuclear bombs were at the time subject to export licenses. Those same machines now are freely exportable, they are by now outdated, but they worked once...

IIRC at least one State government in Australia has banned possession of 3D print files for guns.

I've no idea if they have banned possession of paper schematics for making sten guns, turning a shovel in an AK receiver or Luty's machinegun book.

Realistically the horse has already bolted. Low hanging fruit will get caught or get themselves killed.

Those with intelligence and intent will get around the rules and stay well under the radar.

The purveyor of the Ghost AR15 printer was originally charged under the arms export rules. When that looked like failing in court on 1st Amendment grounds he was conveniently charged with child sexual assault after the adult looking hooker he allegedly hired turned him in and stated she was under age. He fled the country.

The screen shot evidence of threats of violence in the affidavit to seize the 8chan servers showed by the use of (You) after each post that the threats were made by the person making the screenshot.

If you are going to piss off the powers-that-be, be prepared to do a Snowdon.

It's government, no logic need apply.

It's government, no logic need apply.

Now that is a universal truth..!!

They have charged people/companies under the munitions export law for making the printer control files available on line.

Going back to when PGP got Zimmermann targeted, he countered by publishing the code in a book on the basis that munitions including encryption code needed a licence to export, but the export of books is protected by the First Amendment.

It never got to court, but there are subsequent cases for other code where it was ruled cryptographic software source code is speech protected by the First Amendment.

Since the Gov chose to place encryption code in the munitions law, it would seem that 'printer code files' for 3D printing of say guns, would also be covered if published in a book.

Not that I'm planning to test the theory. :)

ps

You said 'charged with', not 'found guilty', big difference.

Since the Gov chose to place encryption code in the munitions law, it would seem that 'printer code files' for 3D printing of say guns, would also be covered if published in a book.

Yes, the companies involved are fighting it in court on that basis. The way it's been going, they'll have to take it all the way to the Supreme Court. It may get there next year or the year after.

It may get there next year or the year after.

By 2025 at least. Or at least by 2040. Maybe, by 2060?

By 2025 at least. Or at least by 2040. Maybe, by 2060?

No, the only way it goes past 2021 without getting to SCOTUS is if either the government or the companies involved give up. The last I saw anything on the case, neither looked likely.

I was being facetious.

I was being facetious.

If you have the urge to be flippant... I can suggest things to enjoy 'flipping'.

:)

The 2nd Amendment Heller case took six years to get to SCOTUS. The Court of Appeals sat on it for several years before making a decision in favour of the plaintiff.
The District of Columbia then made the tactical error of appealing to SCOTUS, who had spent the last 50 years refusing to hear any 2nd amendment appeals.

If they had left it alone then the ruling would only have applied in DC, not any other Federal territory.
A majority of the Congress, the Vice President and a majority of the States all lobbied SCOTUS to approve the case for certiorari.
SCOTUS granted certiorari on two limited questions and subsequently upheld the right to have a handgun in the home for self defense. This was applicable to all Federal territories.
Two years later, in the McDonald case, SCOTUS ruled that the same restrictions applied to the States, but left it up to the lower courts to work out what legislation was still allowed.
In the nine years since then several courts have effectively ignored Heller & McDonald, or interpreted them so narrowly that there is no right.
SCOTUS has refused to grant certiorari on any appeal, or on any new case based on the 2nd amendment.

That's 19 years without final resolution (except for Justice Scalia, author of the Heller decision, who died with a pillow over his face and was buried without autopsy).

I know this is TL,DR; but if SCOTUS doesn't want to bring in a decision on any case, they can simply refuse to grant certiorari.

If an appeals court or circuit court knows which way SCOTUS is likely to vote and doesn't like it, then they can hold the case until one or more SCOTUS judges retire or die. Which is what the DC Court of Appeals did.

Sandra Day O'Connor wrote a book on the Bill of Rights that went 1st,---,3rd, 4th, etc. The DC Court of Appeals sat on the case until she retired and Machine Gun Sammy Alito replaced her.

Robert Heinlein said it best. There Ain't No Justice. Constitutional law is politics by other means.

Two words: electronic warfare. And strong encryption is STILL covered by that law.

Obviously encryption is part of electronic warfare. Lumping computer code in with munitions? Why not a stand alone law? Why munitions instead of say spying? *shrug*

Lumping computer code in with munitions? Why not a stand alone law? Why munitions instead of say spying?

Because that's how congress wrote the law. It covers nearly anything other than food and basic raw materials that the military considers necessary to modern warfare.

It is a little like website design, most think that it is important to have the latest whistles and bells, yet as of 2013, 9.4 million Americans were still using dial-up. To them a site that loads fast is much better than one that looks great after loading for ten minutes.

Bless you for reminding us of that... now in the late days of '19, I'm thinking that figure has changed little, and may even be higher. US 'net access remains spotty and far behind needs in rural regions.

Somebody could mention this to banks, credit unions, gov't agencies (local, state and federal) except they a) aren't listening, and b) couldn't care less.

Now at our doddering, advanced age the Spouse & I are discovering it's all switching over to smart phones and thumb-twiddle pads -- which we ain't got. So we can next year, maybe, bin the landline phones and dump the 'puters cuz we can no longer talk to anybody -- 'cept here, and that don't count.

Somebody could mention this to banks, credit unions, gov't agencies (local, state and federal) except they a) aren't listening, and b) couldn't care less.

No government department actually helps those most in need of what the department is mandated to do. Getting help to those most in need requires effort, imagination, and mostly extra time, not the way to garner high volume results that make those departments look good.

Well... this certainly took an educational turn...

Knowledge = Power
Power charges batteries
Batteries power vibrators

QED

Knowledge = Orgasms

:)

I know just enough to be dangerous on the subject. Those links and the discussion filled in several knowledge base holes I didn't realize I had. Though I don't think it peaked the inner geek to orgasm levels. :)

Those links and the discussion filled in several knowledge base holes I didn't realize I had.

Glad to be of some small service.

Though I don't think it peaked the inner geek to orgasm levels. :)

Better lick next time ;)

Knowledge = Orgasms

I don't care who you are, that there is funny. :)

This may be one of the reasons for the push to ban cash transactions in China, the EU and Australia.

If all money is online then it is easier to track, trace and tax. That is more than enough motivation to attempt to ban cash.

Of course without printed money nobody can buy or sell when the power goes out. Any natural disaster tends to take out the power grid, at least locally. Oops.

Those wishing to evade tax etc have long since used gems etc and that probably won't change, the issue is with everyday trade, buying milk and bread when you only have a debit card and no power.

Of course money only works if everyone accepts that it actually has value. The days of the 'gold standard' are long gone. Bitcoins are another example, worthless unless you accept they have a notional value. If any Gov really did 'ban' cash, how long before people started using an alternative? THAT is scary for Gov because they then have no control over it.

So no, whilst there might be increased limits on how much cash you can carry through a checkpoint etc, no Gov is going to ban it, simply because they'd lose control of whatever replaced it.

Barter isn't an option, yes it has worked in the past, but few people these days own things with which they could barter for basics for any length of time and in the average disaster most of their property is wrecked, ruined or lost.

Banning cash completely is simply too risky.

Never mind that the reason the sparks from the power lines cause fires is because someone convinced people that all those plants need to be protected -

There's also the issue of way too much deferred maintenance, because back in the 1990s, California decided to deliberately bankrupt all of their retail electric utilities.

California regulators took three actions that combined pretty much guaranteed that all of the retail electric utilities would bankrupt.

1. Cap retail electric rates.
2. Force the regulated retail utilities to sell all or nearly all of their generating capacity to unregulated (and unaffiliated) independent generating companies.
3. Prohibited the retail utilities from forming long term contracts with the independent generating companies for supply price stability. Thus forcing the utilities to buy all their power on the spot market.

But California wants to blame Enron for manipulating prices. No matter the fact that even if that never happened, it would only have put off the resulting crisis for a few years anyway.

Compulsory erections for make (male?) judges and jurors?

That's gonna get stiff opposition... But not for long.

All lawyers to be attractive naked females?

Sexist and stupid to legislate a subjective value. Attractive to whom?

A NakedinCourt (NiC) universe?

Already been done, maybe not on this site but I seem to recall seeing a series about naked lawyers in and out of court.

Mind boggling ...

For mind boggling I refer you to the thoughts of the whale and the flowerpot.
(Bonus points for recognising the book/author)

(Bonus points for recognising the book/author)

:
:
:
I wonder if it'll be friendly with me?

Oh, no, not again!

I wonder if it'll be friendly with me?

Oh, no, not again!

Have a golden bail on me, you earned it.. :)

If you really want to...
From government over reach in trying to turn back the tide of tech we can segue to the divine right of kings, Canute and just how many tides a day did he order to halt?

Canute and just how many tides a day did he order to halt?

I'll wave, thanks all the same. :)