Omniscience Protocol 356
solidox writes "There is a new RFC discussing the Omniscience Protocol.
It proposes that every computer be installed with an OP Client which would allow law enforcement ('Good guys.') and copyright holders (RIAA, MPAA) to remotely destroy the computer of any user who has been involved in copyright infringement ('evil-doer'). The client will be completely undetectable and unremovable by even the most skilled hacker. It also must be able to report to the server at any time. 'The OP must be able to communicate through uncooperative firewalls, NATs, and when the computer is disconnected from the Internet.' So if your computer randomly blows up in the next while, you can put the blame on this."
Old News! (Score:5, Funny)
(Call me before they go gold with the omega release, though...)
Scariest thing I have every read (Score:4, Funny)
Remote Destruction (Score:5, Funny)
This statement reminded me of the "hacker" from the movie The Core [imdb.com], who asked for an unlimited supply of hotpockets and Xena tapes. But I've seen this post before, or is it deja vu? Fact is, any system that can be built, can be bypassed, so I don't know what the hell he's talking about.
Who cares about the RFC.. (Score:5, Funny)
April blah blah blah (Score:0, Funny)
Finally! (Score:5, Funny)
communicate disconnected from the internet? (Score:5, Funny)
Why? (Score:3, Funny)
Misprint (Score:5, Funny)
I think they actually meant:
"to remotely destroy the user of any computer who has been involved in copyright infringement"
Will this be based on RFC 3514? (Score:5, Funny)
http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc3514.html
It's going to be a loooong day. (Score:5, Funny)
oh please (Score:2, Funny)
Maybe its just me, but this sounds like a pile of crap. Aside from the fact that its just a ridiculous concept...name something that can be installed that even a skilled "hacker" can't edit, work around, or completely remove.
Power lines and other shortcomings (Score:5, Funny)
So I doubt this RFC would gain adoption without those things.
NEVER. (Score:2, Funny)
Hah! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:communicate disconnected from the internet? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Scariest thing I have every read (Score:2, Funny)
That Blamed Evil Bit (Score:2, Funny)
Re:SPAM Mails are more believable (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Simply patheticc. (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Mod on April Fools Day (Score:5, Funny)
Gullible: adj, easily fooled.
(And they told me "gullible" wasn't in my dictionary)
The funny thing is ... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Scariest thing I have every read (Score:0, Funny)
AAAAARRRGH! Goddamnit! It's LOSE, not LOOSE, LOSE, not LOOSE!
Lose
Lose
Lose
Lose
Lose
Lose
lose
BANG!
Re:Scariest thing I have every read (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Power lines and other shortcomings (Score:5, Funny)
Scariest? Do you not mean funniest? (Score:1, Funny)
Re:Read the RFC (date) (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Oh purlease (Score:3, Funny)
I think it's the people who feel a need to comment on Slashdot on such a thing ... oh wait ...
Re:Scariest thing I have every read (Score:2, Funny)
Please... (Score:3, Funny)
-Shadow
Re:Why? (Score:3, Funny)
Happy April Fool's Day. D@mn I'm dumb...
Re:Yeah, So What? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Please... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Scariest thing I have every read (Score:3, Funny)
Hail the computer! The computer is our friend!
Re:Why? (Score:3, Funny)
The government would never allow this. No way.
Re:Simply patheticc. (Score:2, Funny)