I know you're just trolling, but that's like saying we can't know Word actually deletes characters when you hit backspace, rather than simply storing and not rendering them.
I think that anyone who knowingly disregards a security hole which compromises the privacy of a customer should be treated the same way as a company that gives away the same information without explicitly stating such. What do you think would happen to a phone company that posted several TB of recorded conversations online? Should it be any different for an ISP that knowingly leaks e-mail correspondences?
I'm assuming you were trying to be funny, but just in case, I feel like ranting for a few paragraphs.
All we gotta do is outlaw the holes as they become known. And to reduce this so-called zero-day effect, we'll look to the free-market to improve efficiency.
Do you have any idea how long it takes to pass a law, how bloated the books would become with such specific legislation, and how many people would lose sleep over working on this every time someone found a new hole in IE? All we need is legislation that outlaws a malicious attack on a live server, but allows people to freely prod around in test environments. After all, it's illegal to stab someone in the face, but there's nothing that says a med student can't poke around in a cadaver to study anatomy or find the cause of death.
Microsoft One-Care Live (or whatever it is called) sound like a nice name for the service, doesn't?
I wouldn't say 'crush'. Also, they're not stupid (or poor) enough to drag companies into court over software patents (At least I'd hope so). Think of it as FUD-protection money.
Even so, they could at least find a better charge. Maybe expand the meaning of 'indecent exposure'. After all, how does looking at a picture injure someone? Is there some other obscure definition for the word 'injury' that I'm missing?
It may seem that I'm being pedantic, but that charge makes it out have been a violent crime. One misinterpreted charge could mean a lot for someone. Regardless of how disgusting the actual crime was, it shouldn't be made out to have been more.
Sure. As long as they don't have sound, don't open a new window, or otherwise block the content I came to see, I may check one if it interests me. So far, I've seen very few sites with ads which meet the above criteria.
Look on the bright side of things. If this ridiculously specific law works, we won't have to worry about all of that background noise, shaky views, and timestamps in our pirated movies.
On a more serious note, copyright laws forbid this and so do the policies in most theaters. If those aren't working then the violators are obviously doing a decent job of hiding their cameras. Wouldn't it make more sense for the individual theaters to check visitors at the door rather than repeating threats of imprisonment and fines to someone who already knows he's breaking the law? I certainly wouldn't mind waiting a few more seconds that would otherwise be wasted by the ads anyway.
A package manager for Windows. That's great and all, but will I be able to get out of the install-reboot game every time I have to set up a new computer for someone? What benefits will this have over just doing a Google search for "Lua compiler" and comparing feature lists? I can see a lot of benefits for the developers, suck as skipping an installer altogether, but all the end-user can rely on is trial and error if there are ten programs under the same category and no detailed feature lists.
As far as I'm concerned, they should at least make a thicker, heavier version to release with this one. 2.5lbs. is a bit too light in my opinion. With the keys set even closer, I'd end up pushing the keyboard down on one side (They're called laptops, remember?). I'm also concerned about the durability of something that thin (at least while that wide, as well) - I don't want to snap the damn thing when it hits the ground after I flip it off of my legs by hitting tab.
I'm even more concerned about the 'exposed' screen. Without any real frame around the screen, it'll be much easier to scratch and even crack.
I'm a bit confused by your analogy. I was convinced that electrons didn't orbit in any sort of path, and that they just constantly moved to random positions in the shell.
Slashdot Mirror
Or how about everyone stop treating their choice of operating system as a religion? Hmm?
I'm afraid the goggles do nothing. I'm sorry.
You damn well can. It just means you probably deserved to be victimized in whatever way you were.
If I keyed someone's car, I just perpetrated vandalism.
If I got ran over a few times, I just became the victim of vehicular homicide.
I know you're just trolling, but that's like saying we can't know Word actually deletes characters when you hit backspace, rather than simply storing and not rendering them.
I think that anyone who knowingly disregards a security hole which compromises the privacy of a customer should be treated the same way as a company that gives away the same information without explicitly stating such.
What do you think would happen to a phone company that posted several TB of recorded conversations online? Should it be any different for an ISP that knowingly leaks e-mail correspondences?
Do you have any idea how long it takes to pass a law, how bloated the books would become with such specific legislation, and how many people would lose sleep over working on this every time someone found a new hole in IE? All we need is legislation that outlaws a malicious attack on a live server, but allows people to freely prod around in test environments. After all, it's illegal to stab someone in the face, but there's nothing that says a med student can't poke around in a cadaver to study anatomy or find the cause of death.
Someone mod parent +5, funny.
...Am I the only one who thinks this thread reads like the Timecube site?
I wouldn't say 'crush'. Also, they're not stupid (or poor) enough to drag companies into court over software patents (At least I'd hope so). Think of it as FUD-protection money.
Even so, they could at least find a better charge. Maybe expand the meaning of 'indecent exposure'. After all, how does looking at a picture injure someone? Is there some other obscure definition for the word 'injury' that I'm missing?
It may seem that I'm being pedantic, but that charge makes it out have been a violent crime. One misinterpreted charge could mean a lot for someone. Regardless of how disgusting the actual crime was, it shouldn't be made out to have been more.
Copypasta or no, the sentiment still stands true.
Sure. As long as they don't have sound, don't open a new window, or otherwise block the content I came to see, I may check one if it interests me.
So far, I've seen very few sites with ads which meet the above criteria.
Well, luckily my wife doesn't need to be shocking nor hot. She's inflatable.
Your mother? Bah. Vin Diesel is the new your mother.
Show me a person who builds a new computer every 18 months just because it's cheaper to do so than the year before.
Look on the bright side of things. If this ridiculously specific law works, we won't have to worry about all of that background noise, shaky views, and timestamps in our pirated movies.
On a more serious note, copyright laws forbid this and so do the policies in most theaters. If those aren't working then the violators are obviously doing a decent job of hiding their cameras.
Wouldn't it make more sense for the individual theaters to check visitors at the door rather than repeating threats of imprisonment and fines to someone who already knows he's breaking the law? I certainly wouldn't mind waiting a few more seconds that would otherwise be wasted by the ads anyway.
Life has no room for tables.
Unless these can be integrated into the tops of CRT monitors, this idea will go the way of WebTV.
A package manager for Windows. That's great and all, but will I be able to get out of the install-reboot game every time I have to set up a new computer for someone? What benefits will this have over just doing a Google search for "Lua compiler" and comparing feature lists?
I can see a lot of benefits for the developers, suck as skipping an installer altogether, but all the end-user can rely on is trial and error if there are ten programs under the same category and no detailed feature lists.
Still, $1+shipping is pretty good (as long as you don't find a 20lb. book).
Now that's something I want to see!
As far as I'm concerned, they should at least make a thicker, heavier version to release with this one. 2.5lbs. is a bit too light in my opinion. With the keys set even closer, I'd end up pushing the keyboard down on one side (They're called laptops, remember?).
I'm also concerned about the durability of something that thin (at least while that wide, as well) - I don't want to snap the damn thing when it hits the ground after I flip it off of my legs by hitting tab.
I'm even more concerned about the 'exposed' screen. Without any real frame around the screen, it'll be much easier to scratch and even crack.
And it's to help prevent terrorism. ...Role reversal, anyone?
Probably. Intel appears to be selling three, counting this one.
More seriously, there was a post about an OLPC manufacturer planning to sell these to everyone else.
You got that far? I stopped wanting it just after I flipped my keyboard upside down to see what came out.
I'm a bit confused by your analogy. I was convinced that electrons didn't orbit in any sort of path, and that they just constantly moved to random positions in the shell.
And if I can report them as I ignore them, everyone else gets one less message. The reverse will be true as well.