Yeah, the ad became a lot worse once you realized who did it. The same ad would have been a lot better with a different logo at the end, wouldn't it?
And it's extra-bad that both the cat-herding ad and the running-with-the-squirrels ad are rated #1 by the viewers. Anything that anyone likes can't be any good. -- I moderate at +3, Highest Scores, and I always mod down.
41 years old. Just quit a $92k/yr job for one paying $105k/yr and 20k shares for signing up. Three weeks vacation a year, 40-hour weeks. Granted, I'm a manager, not a code kid, but anyone who thinks coding skill is more valuable than leadership doesn't deserve more than minimum wage.
The difference -- as is obvious to anyone over the age of nineteen -- is that you chose your employer. If you don't like the fact that you are expected to use company equipment for company purposes, quit. Your employer doesn't give you a paycheck and workstation because they pity your lack of broadband access to Napster.
On the other tentacle, trying to quit your government will get you shot. You may think that not being allowed to download pr0n is worse than being shot, but I disagree.
So how many "my computer melted down, the power has failed, there's rioting in the streets, and my family and I are fleeing the city -- but I took the time to write up this article for slashdot 'cause I believe that Geeks Have A Right To Know" posts do you expect to have submitted?
Many posters seem to think this attack will be trivial to defeat. That is a stupid attitude, and will get us crushed faster than anything short of insulting the judge (who is a lawyer). It is not the case that if a trade secret is revealed, it's "game over, man!" for the secret-keeper. Theft of trade secrets is illegal. If the judge decides we improperly acquired the trade secret, we're outlaws and can be criminally prosecuted.
From Nolo Press:
The most important point to understand about trade secrets is that there is no crisp, clear definition of what they are. Rather, the context in which a dispute over ownership of information arises will determine whether a court will treat the information as a trade secret. As a general rule, information that has commercial value and that has been scrupulously kept confidential will be considered a trade secret; the owner of the information will be entitled to court relief against those who have stolen or divulged it in violation of a duty of trust or a written nondisclosure agreement.
In most states, a trade secret may consist of any formula, pattern, physical device, idea, process, compilation of information or other information that both:
provides the owner of the information with a competitive advantage in the marketplace, and
is treated in a way that can reasonably be expected to prevent the public or competitors from learning about it, absent improper acquisition or theft.
Trade secrets often comprise customer lists and other sensitive marketing information. Other specific items that may be trade secrets include:
biological inventions (unpatented)
chemical inventions (unpatented)
computer hardware
computer software
cosmetics
electrical inventions (unpatented)
electronic inventions (unpatented)
fabric
food inventions
formulas--chemical
formulas--cosmetic
formulas--food
machines
machines--internal parts
magic tricks or techniques
manufacturing processes
mechanical inventions
medical devices--mechanical
movie plots (not written)
movies--script
movies--treatment
musical composition
odors/processes
photographic processes, and
project designs.
The one element that these items of information have in common is that they have the potential to make money for their owners if they are kept secret from would-be competitors and are used to make money in the marketplace.
As mentioned, a trade secret is any information that both benefits a business commercially and is kept a secret. More specifically, when deciding whether something qualifies as a trade secret, courts will typically consider the following factors:
the extent to which the information is known outside of the particular business entity
the extent to which the information is known by employees and others involved in the business
the extent to which measures have been taken to guard the secrecy of the information
the value of the information to the business, and
the difficulty with which the information could be properly acquired or independently duplicated by others.
Information that qualifies as a trade secret is subject to legal protection (against theft and misappropriation) as a form of valuable property--but only if the owner has taken the necessary steps to preserve its secrecy. If the owner has not diligently tried to keep the information secret, courts will usually refuse to extend any help to the trade secret owner if others learn of the information.
Some activities that the courts will commonly treat as trade secret theft--which means the owner will be afforded some judicial relief, such as damages or an order preventing use of the stolen information--are:
disclosures by key employees (current and former managers, scientists and others occupying positions of trust) in violation of their duty of trust toward their employer
disclosures by employees (current and former) in violation of a confidentiality agreement entered into with their employer
disclosures by suppliers, consultants, financial advisors or others who signed nondisclosure agreements with the trade secret owner, promising not to disclose the information industrial espionage, and
disclosures by any person owing an implied duty to the employer not to make such disclosure, such as directors, corporate offices and other high-level salaried employees.
When a disclosure is considered wrongful, the courts may also consider use of the information wrongful and issue an order (injunction) preventing its use for a particular period of time.
If the court finds that trade secret theft has occurred, it may issue an order (injunction) requiring all those wrongfully in possession of the information to refrain from using it or disclosing it to others. The court may also award the trade secret owner money damages to compensate for any monetary loss suffered as a result of the theft. In cases involving willful or deliberate theft, the court may also award punitive damages to punish the wrongdoer. Finally, in extreme cases, criminal antitheft laws may be invoked and the trade secret thief subjected to criminal prosecution.
There are one or two of us "/. libertarians" who actually have the courage of our convictions. I want no regulation at all even when I receive a bad prescription myself. Y'see, unlike most people, I take responsibility for myself. I don't expect (or want) the Mommy State to take care of me.
There's a difference between the reality of "traces of cocaine in his blood" and the hype "he was also a coke fiend." Typical Slashdot overreaction, blaming irrelevant details for a deeper problem.
Axes to grind? We don't have no stinkin' axes to grind!
Neutral terms such as "prohibited copying" or "unauthorized copying" are available for use instead. Some of us might even prefer to use a positive term such as "sharing information with your neighbor."
Rather than mealy-mouthed exulpation, some of us might prefer accurate terms like "theft."
I do like the comment that says they should "start acting on Internet Time rather than Washington Time".. Struck me as supremely true.
Unfortunately, I'm not sure they can.
Unfortunate?!? Are you mad? I can think of nothing scarier than a government able to operate on Internet time!
The only reason we have anything even remotely resembling liberty in this country is that "gridlock" is designed into our government.
God forbid that we ever get the government we (are forced to) pay for!
There's almost no point in having children. Maybe most of the children born today are accidents?! Maybe they're a status symbol....
The point of having children is children. I boggle at having to explain this; I'll swipe Louis Armstrong's answer: "If you have to ask, man, you'll never know."
While I realize that looking farther ahead than next week is alien to most First Worlders, I cannot comprehend a person so obsessively self-centered as to believe that children have no "point" or are merely a status symbol.
That such people exist, however, is undeniably obvious. Just look at the popularity of infanticide. Is your son bothering you? Have him removed! Is your daughter threatening to affect your "lifestyle"? Throw her away!
And of course you can cite official government documents outlining this policy? An Executive Order, maybe? (Lord knows, Clinton has written enough -- surely you can find just one talking about population control.)
No?
So it was mentioned in a speech somewhere, and you can give a name and date?
No?
Ah! I see! The "gov" refers to the voices in your head! Okay, thanks. You can go back to your shortwave radio and your mimeographed tracts now. We'll call you when it's your turn in the disintegration booth.
Slashdot Mirror
I know for a fact that Scientologists have contributed to the World Wide Web. Don't forget to boycott that, too.
We've known for over ten years that the Milky Way is a barred spiral -- where have you been?
Is Bernard Shifman a "moron spammer?"
91.6% -- Yes. Hundreds of complaints can't be wrong. (456 responses)
8.4% -- No. Give the guy a break. He's looking for a job. (42 responses)
498 total responses
If we don't pass on every hoax story we see, the terrorists will have already won.
Of course, it's better to be safe than sorry, so patriots don't let patriots use XP!
Wikipedia.
http://www.wikipedia.com if you're frightened of links.
There is no content on the Web that is worth a penny a page.
Present company most definitely included.
I'm not worried about suddenly losing my job, but then I concentrate on doing what I'm paid to do, rather than playing with toys at work.
Yeah, the ad became a lot worse once you realized who did it. The same ad would have been a lot better with a different logo at the end, wouldn't it?
And it's extra-bad that both the cat-herding ad and the running-with-the-squirrels ad are rated #1 by the viewers. Anything that anyone likes can't be any good.
--
I moderate at +3, Highest Scores, and I always mod down.
41 years old. Just quit a $92k/yr job for one paying $105k/yr and 20k shares for signing up. Three weeks vacation a year, 40-hour weeks. Granted, I'm a manager, not a code kid, but anyone who thinks coding skill is more valuable than leadership doesn't deserve more than minimum wage.
--
O'Reilly would still be looking for his ass if Dickinson hadn't handed it to him. If O'Reilly is the best advocate we've got, we're in deep dd.
Yeah, yeah, -1 Flamebait: Dared to Criticize an Anointed Slashgod. Moderate me, big boy.
--
Nanotech can to anything , just like atomic power could in the 1950s.
--
The difference -- as is obvious to anyone over the age of nineteen -- is that you chose your employer. If you don't like the fact that you are expected to use company equipment for company purposes, quit. Your employer doesn't give you a paycheck and workstation because they pity your lack of broadband access to Napster.
On the other tentacle, trying to quit your government will get you shot. You may think that not being allowed to download pr0n is worse than being shot, but I disagree.
--
All my experience indicates that what information wants is to be badly formatted.
--
To describe ØKOKRIM, you need know only one word of Norwegian: quisling.
--
So how many "my computer melted down, the power has failed, there's rioting in the streets, and my family and I are fleeing the city -- but I took the time to write up this article for slashdot 'cause I believe that Geeks Have A Right To Know" posts do you expect to have submitted?
--
Many posters seem to think this attack will be trivial to defeat. That is a stupid attitude, and will get us crushed faster than anything short of insulting the judge (who is a lawyer). It is not the case that if a trade secret is revealed, it's "game over, man!" for the secret-keeper. Theft of trade secrets is illegal. If the judge decides we improperly acquired the trade secret, we're outlaws and can be criminally prosecuted.
From Nolo Press:
The most important point to understand about trade secrets is that there is no crisp, clear definition of what they are. Rather, the context in which a dispute over ownership of information arises will determine whether a court will treat the information as a trade secret. As a general rule, information that has commercial value and that has been scrupulously kept confidential will be considered a trade secret; the owner of the information will be entitled to court relief against those who have stolen or divulged it in violation of a duty of trust or a written nondisclosure agreement.
In most states, a trade secret may consist of any formula, pattern, physical device, idea, process, compilation of information or other information that both:
Trade secrets often comprise customer lists and other sensitive marketing information. Other specific items that may be trade secrets include:
The one element that these items of information have in common is that they have the potential to make money for their owners if they are kept secret from would-be competitors and are used to make money in the marketplace.
As mentioned, a trade secret is any information that both benefits a business commercially and is kept a secret. More specifically, when deciding whether something qualifies as a trade secret, courts will typically consider the following factors:
Information that qualifies as a trade secret is subject to legal protection (against theft and misappropriation) as a form of valuable property--but only if the owner has taken the necessary steps to preserve its secrecy. If the owner has not diligently tried to keep the information secret, courts will usually refuse to extend any help to the trade secret owner if others learn of the information.
Some activities that the courts will commonly treat as trade secret theft--which means the owner will be afforded some judicial relief, such as damages or an order preventing use of the stolen information--are:
When a disclosure is considered wrongful, the courts may also consider use of the information wrongful and issue an order (injunction) preventing its use for a particular period of time.
If the court finds that trade secret theft has occurred, it may issue an order (injunction) requiring all those wrongfully in possession of the information to refrain from using it or disclosing it to others. The court may also award the trade secret owner money damages to compensate for any monetary loss suffered as a result of the theft. In cases involving willful or deliberate theft, the court may also award punitive damages to punish the wrongdoer. Finally, in extreme cases, criminal antitheft laws may be invoked and the trade secret thief subjected to criminal prosecution.
--
There are one or two of us "/. libertarians" who actually have the courage of our convictions. I want no regulation at all even when I receive a bad prescription myself. Y'see, unlike most people, I take responsibility for myself. I don't expect (or want) the Mommy State to take care of me.
--
There's a difference between the reality of "traces of cocaine in his blood" and the hype "he was also a coke fiend." Typical Slashdot overreaction, blaming irrelevant details for a deeper problem.
Axes to grind? We don't have no stinkin' axes to grind!
--
Rather than mealy-mouthed exulpation, some of us might prefer accurate terms like "theft."
--
Unfortunate?!? Are you mad? I can think of nothing scarier than a government able to operate on Internet time!
The only reason we have anything even remotely resembling liberty in this country is that "gridlock" is designed into our government.
God forbid that we ever get the government we (are forced to) pay for!
--
Megalomania. Microsoft could not possibly care less what you do to yourself and call "thought." You are trivial.
--
Try reading it.
--
The point of having children is children. I boggle at having to explain this; I'll swipe Louis Armstrong's answer: "If you have to ask, man, you'll never know."
While I realize that looking farther ahead than next week is alien to most First Worlders, I cannot comprehend a person so obsessively self-centered as to believe that children have no "point" or are merely a status symbol.
That such people exist, however, is undeniably obvious. Just look at the popularity of infanticide. Is your son bothering you? Have him removed! Is your daughter threatening to affect your "lifestyle"? Throw her away!
--
And of course you can cite official government documents outlining this policy? An Executive Order, maybe? (Lord knows, Clinton has written enough -- surely you can find just one talking about population control.)
No?
So it was mentioned in a speech somewhere, and you can give a name and date?
No?
Ah! I see! The "gov" refers to the voices in your head! Okay, thanks. You can go back to your shortwave radio and your mimeographed tracts now. We'll call you when it's your turn in the disintegration booth.
--