Deceit: A flexible distributed file system

Deceit, a distributed file system (DFS) being developed at Cornell, focuses on flexible file semantics in relation to efficiency, scalability, and reliability. Deceit servers are interchangeable and collectively provide the illusion of a single, large server machine to any clients of the Deceit service. Non-volatile replicas of each file are stored on a subset of the file servers. The user is able to set parameters on a file to achieve different levels of availability, performance, and one-copy serializability. Deceit also supports a file version control mechanism. In contrast with many recent DFS efforts, Deceit can behave like a plain Sun Network File System (NFS) server and can be used by any NFS client without modifying any client software. The current Deceit prototype uses the ISIS Distributed Programming Environment for all communication and process group management, an approach that reduces system complexity and increases system robustness

Internet Service Provider Liability for Contributory Trademark Infringement After Gucci

[I]f a manufacturer or distributor intentionally induces another to infringe a trademark, or if it continues to supply its product to one whom it knows or has reason to know is engaging in trademark infringement, the manufacturer or distributor is contributorially responsible for any harm done as a result of the deceit

The Fraud-on-the-Market Tort

Fraud on the market is at the core of contemporary securities law, permitting 10b-5 class actions to proceed without direct proof of investor reliance on a misrepresentation. Yet the ambiguities of this idea have fractured the Supreme Court from its initial recognition of the doctrine in Basic v. Levinson to its recent decision in Amgen, Inc. v. Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds. Amidst divergent views of the coherence and advisability of liability for fraud on the market a fundamental question lurks: is a suit for damages that invokes the fraud-on-the-market theory a claim for common law deceit, such that liability is properly limited by requirements such as scienter and loss causation, or is it an indirect regulatory enforcement action that should be unconstrained by these requirements so that liability can better serve its deterrent and compensatory purposes? Rejecting both of these options, we argue for a third way. Fraud-on-the-market claims are not private attorney general actions; they are genuine tort claims through which victims seek redress for having been wronged. Yet the wrong differs fundamentally in substance from the wrong of deceit. Building on a careful analysis of Dura Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Broudo, Basic v. Levinson, and common law, we articulate the unique character of the fraud-on-the-market tort. Rooted not in deceit but instead in the Congressionally recognized right of investors to trust in the integrity of securities markets, it does not protect investors from being deceived, but rather protects them against economic loss caused by intentional distortions of market prices. This simultaneously explains why fraud-on-the-market plaintiffs are properly freed from having to prove reliance and why the Supreme Court was perhaps justified in imposing restrictions on liability that are foreign to the common law

Trust and Betrayal in the Medical Marketplace

The author argues in this Comment that disingenuity as first resort is an unwise approach to the conflict between our ex ante and our later, illness-endangered selves. Not only does rationing by tacit deceit raise a host of moral problems, it will not work, over the long haul, because markets reward deceit\u27s unmasking. The honesty about clinical limit-setting that some bioethicists urge may not be fully within our reach. But more candor is possible than we now achieve, and the more conscious we are about decisions to impose limits, the more inclined we will be to accept them without experiencing betrayal

The ISIS project: Fault-tolerance in large distributed systems

The semi-annual status report covers activities of the ISIS project during the second half of 1989. The project had several independent objectives: (1) At the level of the ISIS Toolkit, ISIS release V2.0 was completed, containing bypass communication protocols. Performance of the system is greatly enhanced by this change, but the initial software release is limited in some respects. (2) The Meta project focused on the definition of the Lomita programming language for specifying rules that monitor sensors for conditions of interest and triggering appropriate reactions. This design was completed, and implementation of Lomita is underway on the Meta 2.0 platform. (3) The Deceit file system effort completed a prototype. It is planned to make Deceit available for use in two hospital information systems. (4) A long-haul communication subsystem project was completed and can be used as part of ISIS. This effort resulted in tools for linking ISIS systems on different LANs together over long-haul communications lines. (5) Magic Lantern, a graphical tool for building application monitoring and control interfaces, is included as part of the general ISIS releases

Outsmarting the liars: toward a cognitive lie detection approach

Five decades of lie detection research have shown that people’s ability to detect deception by observing behavior and listening to speech is limited. The problem is that cues to deception are typically faint and unreliable. The aim for interviewers, therefore, is to ask questions that actively elicit and amplify verbal and nonverbal cues to deceit. We present an innovative lie detection perspective based on cognitive load, demonstrating that it is possible to ask questions that raise cognitive load more in liars than in truth tellers. This cognitive lie detection perspective consists of two approaches. The imposing-cognitive-load approach aims to make the interview setting more difficult for interviewees. We argue that this affects liars more than truth tellers, resulting in more, and more blatant, cues to deceit. The strategic-questioning approach examines different ways of questioning that elicit the most differential responses between truth tellers and liars. </jats:p

Hong Kong – The new offence of fraud

Letter from Hong Kong by John Reading SC (Senior Assistant Director of Public Prosecutions, Commercial Crime Unit, Department of Justice, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region) describing how Hong Kong’s legislature enacted a statutory offence of fraud by inserting a new section (16A) in the Theft Ordinance. Jean reading prosecutes fraud and corruption cases and is a Senior Counsel. Published in the Letter from … section of Amicus Curiae - Journal of the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies and its Society for Advanced Legal Studies. The Journal is produced by the Society for Advanced Legal Studies at the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, University of London

How private is private information?:The ability to spot deception in an economic game

We provide experimental evidence on the ability to detect deceit in a buyer-seller game with asymmetric information. Sellers have private information about the buyer's valuation of a good and sometimes have incentives to mislead buyers. We examine if buyers can spot deception in face-to-face encounters. We vary (1) whether or not the buyer can interrogate the seller, and (2) the contextual richness of the situation. We find that the buyers' prediction accuracy is above chance levels, and that interrogation and contextual richness are important factors determining the accuracy. These results show that there are circumstances in which part of the information asymmetry is eliminated by people's ability to spot deception