A cheap amikacin full-thickness, or complete tear, totally severs the tendon from the gel discount bone and may leave a hole in the tendon. "People store get generic without remeron prescription living with moderate and severe Alzheimer's and other dementia need buy flagyl without prescription and deserve treatment that improves the quality of their life, buy 60 no prescription required including effective treatments for behavioral and psychiatric symptoms associated with buy zyprexa from us dementia." If a person has UC, their colon lining inflammation cheap pamoate price dangers is usually visible to doctors during a colonoscopy. There is buy celebrex online no reliable way of preventing childhood night sweats when the clomid sale sweating results from an underlying medical condition. Additionally, it can buy cheapest spiriva on line mean that they are experiencing both bipolar disorder and another buy cipro low price mental health condition but receive a diagnosis for only one buy clomid no rx of them. It may be helpful to talk with your kenalog without prescription doctor or pharmacist, who can provide personalized guidance about cost generic clonidine issues related to Opdivo. It also acts against methicillin-resistant S. aureus.

A report out of the University of Toronto, sponsored by the OpenNet Initiative, reveals that text messages sent via the Chinese variant of the popular Skype software, known as TOM-Skype, are not only filtered and censored, but stored, apparently for later analysis. The report is only 12 well structured pages and easy to read. There is also a New York Times story about these discoveries.

In 2005, Skype, which is owned by eBay, formed a business relationship with TOM Online, a Chinese provider of wireless services, to launch the Chinese version of Skype called TOM-Skype. The service advertises end-to-end encryption, making it a favorite of dissidents and democracy advocates. The Epoch Times reported, for example,

Skype has become a popular communication tool among democracy activists in mainland China in recent years. Due to its excellent vocal clarity, fewer imposed restrictions, and an end-to-end encryption feature making it difficult to monitor, many Chinese democracy activists have favored Skype over traditional telephones and other similar communication tools.

It’s been known for some time that not all text messages were getting through, and that mentioning Falun Gong and such prohibited institutions would cause messages to go undelivered. When called on it, Skype claimed that the messages were simply discarded. Not true.

Not only not true, but drastically not true. The full text of the messages is retained on servers in China along with the identifying information about their source and destination — and so are some messages without any significant keywords, apparently logged based simply on their sender and recipient information.

Due to weak security on the TOM-Skype servers, the researcher was able to download more than one hundred thousand messages and analyze them. Many mentioned the Communist Party or quitting the party or Falun, but others mentioned democracy, the Olympic Games, Taiwan, or milk powder.

The technology is there to do the surveillance — and much of it is in private hands, cooperating with governments in highly profitable ventures that are not what they seem to be.

Skype unequivocally states that there is no surveillance of voice conversations. But why should anyone believe them?

Blown to Bits will be re-launched next Tuesday, October 7, in a conversation hosted by the Berkman Center for Internet and Society, where I am privileged to be a Fellow. The event will take place in Maxwell Dworkin G125 at 6PM, and will be followed by a reception in the lobby. We’ll finish in plenty of time for people to go off and watch the presidential debate. Further details here. Hal, Ken, and Harry will all be there. Come and join us!

Readers of B2B Chapter 8 (Bits in the Air) know about the dynamic of spectrum utilization. Incumbents who got use of the spectrum when technologies were less advanced and could use the resource less efficiently fight to maintain their control and to keep out any competition. They simply have no business reason to look to the public interest of letting others use what they regard to be their land — even though they don’t need as much of it as they used to — or for that matter to use any newly available land, if that would create competition for their business. This dynamic is a huge innovation-stifling force.

The issue of the day is what to do with the parts of the spectrum that will be freed up with TV broadcasting goes all-digital, which will happen in this coming February. The stakes are extremely high, and the level of distortion and rhetoric matches.

There are two basic possibilities; To auction the spectrum to private parties who would be licensed to use it, keeping out anyone else, in exactly the way television, radio, and cellular telephone incumbents now hold licenses to use certain spectrum bands; or to allow the spectrum to be used in an unlicensed fashion, in the way the use of little radio broadcasters and receivers, in the form of the wireless routers used for Internet access in homes and in coffee shops, emerged when a small sliver of spectrum was made available for unlicensed use some years ago.

As the federal government looks for ways to raise cash these days, the advocates for licensed use are claiming that an auction for licensed uses might raise as much as $24B, and that unlicensed use would cause all manner of interference with everything from television to the wireless microphones used in churches.

Advocates for unlicensed use counter that the amount that could be raised from an auction is grossly exaggerated and the interference claims are bogus. And that the economic benefits of allowing the development of unlicensed technologies are enormous. (“Unlicensed” does not mean “unregulated.” Those wireless routers have to stay in their spectrum band and under their power ceiling.)

A clear and sober rebuttal of the incumbents’ claims is in a report called “There is No Windfall in the White Space” by the New America Foundation. From the Summary:

As Alexander Pope opined, hope springs eternal: And exploiting this natural optimism are interest groups holding out the hope of a budgetary windfall for a cash-strapped Congress if only more spectrum can be auctioned at ever-higher prices. Now it is the turn of the digital television (DTV) “white space” to spur this forlorn hope. And this hope is as precisely forlorn as the economic analysis presented below concludes. A one-time auction of the guard band and other vacant channels in each local television market ‚Äì so-called “spectrum white space” ‚Äì would provide minimal revenue to the Treasury, while simultaneously ensuring that most of this unused “beachfront” spectrum will remain fallow, stifling the broadband services and innovation that could generate far more long-term economic activity.

Or you can read this brief report about Google co-founder Larry Page’s opinion, as he expressed it to Congress this week:

Calling claims of potential interference with existing broadcast stations “garbage” and “despicable,” Page charged that FCC field tests this summer had been “rigged” against spectrum-sensing technology that’s designed to enable exploitation of white space.

Google, as we blogged earlier, wants to promote a technology that would allow the same phone to use whatever cellular service is available. More than that, it would actually take bids, on the fly, from the services whose signal power in the area was strong enough, and place the call on whatever network made the best offer.

The level of rhetoric is quite high here. But it’s a once-for-all-time decision between having the government sell an asset to the highest bidder to cover a small part of its debt, or making it available for the public good through innovation by a much broader variety of private enterprises. The incumbents’ experts simply can’t be trusted, and the NAF report explains why.