It wasn't too long ago that On the Media interviewed Electronic Frontier Foundation Senior Staff Attorney Marcia Hofmann about the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA). The act, written in 1986, was designed to outlaw criminal computer hacking, but according to Hofmann, it is written in such a technically imprecise manner that it could be used to prosecute someone who violated Terms of Service for a site like Facebook. 

Six months ago, I was hit by a car while I was riding my bike, and spent months in and out of the hospital and recuperating from incredibly painful surgeries. Six weeks ago, I began using Superbetter, a game designed by game designer and theorist Jane McGonigal, with the express purpose of helping people recover from traumatic injuries and achieve health goals. This weekend, I will wrap up my 6 weeks stint using the game. 

James Murdoch is currently testified before parliament this morning about the News of the World voicemail scandal that erupted earlier this summer. Parliament is streaming the hearing live via its website, and you can follow the Twitter reaction to the hearings right here. If we find an embeddable live stream of the hearings we will embed it on this site as well. See below for the Parliament hearings.

UPDATE: On Thursday, November 10, the Senate split along party lines to defeat the measure that would overturn the FCC Net Neutrality rules. You can read more at Wired's Threat Level blog.

Via The Hill, the Senate is planning a vote to overturn the controversial FCC decision last year to implement net neutrality rules, mere days before they would go into effect:

The FCC’s net-neutrality regulations prevent Internet service providers from slowing down or speeding up access to websites. Wireless carriers are banned from blocking lawful websites or applications that compete with their services.

Supporters of the rules say they preserve competition and protect consumer choice, but opponents argue they impose unnecessary burdens on businesses and amount to government regulation of the Internet.

The FCC approved the rules along party lines last December. They are scheduled to go into effect Nov. 20.

The House already approved the repeal of the FCC's rules in April. The Obama administration has indicated it would veto the law if passed, saying it "would undermine a fundamental part of the Nation’s Open Internet and innovation strategy – an enforceable, effective but flexible policy for keeping the Internet free and open."

Unfortunately, this week's entry will be kind of short. My work week has been incredibly busy, and I haven't been able to devote as much time as I like to Superbetter. I'm hoping that next week, I'll have more time.

Last week, we reported on a proposed change to the rules governing the Freedom of Information Act. The change would essentially allow the government to lie to requesters of information through FOIA by saying that it had no relevant documents, even when it did. Transparency advocates were up in arms about the proposed change, and ACLU policy council Michael German told Brooke this undermines the spirit in which the Freedom of Information Act was drafted:

The purpose of the Freedom of Information Act request is to give the public access to government information, so that public accountability can take place. And one of the key elements of the statute incorporates judicial review in government decisions about exemptions. People have a right to know what exemption is being applied so that they can challenge that in court and a judge can make an independent decision.

According to a press release just posted by the ACLU, the Department of Justice has withdrawn the proposed rule change:

The Department of Justice (DOJ) today withdrew a proposed regulation that would allow government agencies to respond to Freedom of Information Act requests with false denials that the documents sought actually exist, when, in fact, they do. Providing such false denials has apparently been a practice at DOJ for decades, which was most recently revealed in a FOIA lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California.

We've reported numerous times both on the show and on the blog about Righthaven, a company that buys copyrights on newspaper stories and images and then sues bloggers who repost them either in part or in full. Recently, they've suffered setback after setback, having several cases dismissed, and being hit with attorney fees in dismissed cases, and court penalties.

As of yesterday, things have become much worse for Righthaven, as US District Judge Roger Hunt ordered the company to pay nearly $120,000 in court and attorney fees in a failed lawsuit. The Las Vegas Sun's Steve Green reports:

Today at 15:00 GMT, Julian Assange will be answering questions live on The BBC's World Have Your Say. Unfortunately, due to region restrictions, US viewers are not able to watch the program live, but if you have a question for him, you can either post it on the World Have Your Say website in the comments section, or on the WHYS Facebook page. Once the episode is archived, we will post it to our blog. EDIT - It's up now! Check below to see both parts of the Julian Assange interview that aired this afternoon.

I'm now in my fourth week using Superbetter to deal with a traumatic injury I sustained in a bicycle accident, and my co-workers (or at least Brooke) have been talking about how uncharacteristically sunny my disposition is. I would say that at least part of that is due to my continued use of Superbetter.

In my second entry on Superbetter, I discussed my confusion about the usefulness of a couple of aspects of the game - achievements and resilience score. After using the game for a few weeks, I wanted to post a short update about my feelings on the utility of these two aspects of the game.

I'm now entering my third week using Superbetter, a game desgined to help people who have been injured or are trying to reach health goals, to deal with an traumatic injury I sustained in a bike accident. If you missed the previous articles and the story on the show about it, click here for our archive of Superbetter stories.

Since my last post, I've dispensed with all the setup and explanation, and I've recruited several of our listeners as allies in the game. Thanks to my allies, I'm starting to see the great potential of using this game to aid in my recovery.

I've now spent roughly a week using Superbetter after a traumatic injury I sustained in May, and I'm coming to understand the game mechanic a little better. In my last post I detailed the seven missions that I needed to complete in order to set up my "secret headquarters." In this entry, I'll share some details about how I've been using the game, as well as some information about my secret lab, and about the achievement and resilience scores.

In May, I was severely injured in a bicycle accident. I heard about a game that was being designed by Jane McGonigal called Superbetter, which is specifically designed to create "gameful" incentives to help people recuperate physically and emotionally from injury. Brooke interviewed both me and Jane on our most recent episode and I pledged to try using Superbetter for six weeks, blogging about the process and how it potentially helps my convalescence.

On our most recent episode, we spoke to Marcia Hofmann, senior attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, about an ages old law called The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. The act, passed in 1986, was originally meant to prosecute criminal computer hacking, but in recent years it has expanded to cover everything from wiping information from your work hard drive to violating the terms of service agreements for sites like MySpace. Advocates have called for serious reforms for the law, and at least in the case of terms of service violations, it appears the Senate is listening.

There's an air of alchemy and mystery that surrounds the world of hacking, because it's perceived as being so technical. That's part of what makes hacking seem so illicit to non-hackers. But some of the most well known hackers have obtained information using an incredibly low-tech method. That method is called "social engineering."

Earlier this year, Bob interviewed Emmanuel Goldstein (the pen name of hacker Eric Corley), the editor of 2600: The Hacker Quarterly. Bob spoke to Goldstein about organizations like Lulzsec and Anonymous, specifically about their habit of leaking the personal information they obtain by hacking big corporations. Both of these groups are adherents to the "antisec movement," believe that the computer security industry is the emperor that wears no clothes, which they demonstrate time and time again by showing system vulnerabilities. Corley says that the antisec movement is just making us aware of very serious security issues that affect our personal data. Have a listen.

Think you're 31337? Ever produce a hamster, or are you only producing crock? Do you have any idea what I'm talking about? If the answer's yes, then you're probably familiar with the dictionary of hacker slang called The Jargon File. 

All week we've been obliquely referencing what author Steven Levy calls "the hacker ethic" - the notion that information wants to be free, and the more information sharing, the better. This concept covers not only programs and ideas, it covers lingo. Enter the Rosetta Stone of the hacker world: The Jargon File.

There's the one aspect of the hacking world that everyone's familiar with - the world of finding software vulnerabilities and breaking into systems via the internet. But there's a whole world of hacking going on out there that shares the same name, but is different in several ways. This is the world of open source hacking.

The concept of hacking entered the American popular imagination through a fairly unlikely medium – the Hollywood blockbuster. Specifically, the 1983 film Wargames, about a high school hacker whose computer tampering nearly starts a nuclear war.

Journalist Misha Glenny has written extensively about global organized crime, and in his travels he's met quite a few "carders" or hackers who steal credit card information. Glenny recently gave a TED talk about the proliferation of hacking (criminal and otherwise), and proposes a novel solution -- instead of sending these hackers to jail, we should "engage and find ways of offering guidance to these people because they are a remarkable breed."