Re:Responsibility and censorship
on
Nazis on Napster
·
· Score: 1
>> It's not censorship unless it comes from a
>> government agency
People everywhere have a serious problem understanding when 'free speech' applies.
I remember back in the bbs days people crying when the sysop deleted 'nasty words', phrases or entire posts. They yelled 'censorship' and 'free speech violation'.
Just as you have the right to tell somebody not to use nasty words in your house,/. has the right to change the rules and begin editing 'your' posts, the Boy Scouts can fire gay scout masters, and Napster has the right to remove _any_ music for _any_ reason.
If you dont like it, you have the right to remove any software from your computer that promotes the suppression of free speech.
tee-hee, defense of ms in here can only be done safely as anonymous coward. =)
People dont read articles before wailing about them. Their idea is pretty good, except, I didnt see where it said when somebody tries to edit the file, it splits it. Looks to me like it would turn your.cshrc into a symlink, then when you changed it, your friends copy would change as well, without you ever knowing about.
But continuing on to other 'inovations'. Text to speech. Its already been on the MacOS for a while. MS must do most of their 'brainstorming' in front of a line of computers, one running solaris, one running linux, one running macos, etc...
Does anybody have any kind of background on this guy? Maybe its just a coincidence, but a Daniel Morales was CEO of @bigger.net. It was a San Jose based isp. One of the first free service providers. I used to work there. The company died back in 1998 do to some... interesting book work. It was believed (by other executive officers, employees and board members) that Daniel, with the help of his friends (the CFO and another officer, both of which he hired himself) pocketed some cash, tanking the company.
From what I understand, the Daniel Morales of bigger.net was the former CEO of Opus Communications as well. Does anybody have any information on whether or not this is the same guy? Or is it just a coincidence, two people with the same name, in the same area, in questionable businesses?
I work for a.com company. We had this very issue as our entire website is dynamically generated with a single C program. It grabs various parts of pages created mostly with php3. How to index it? Frames. Put a 1 pixel frame at the top of the page. Hardly noticeable, and the search engine sees the frames page, where you can put a whole bunch of comments and meta tags and a tag to get the straight text, depending on the search engine needs.
I could care less about his overuse of 'Information Superhighway' and other marketing 'catch phrases'.
What I care about is the fact that Gore obviously thinks Microsoft is a wonderful company staffed by great people and run by a real swell guy.
That actually wouldn't bother me too much if it wasnt announced (tv news, last week or so) that the white house would be involved with the DoJ's decision making on what to do with Microsoft. $5 says MS gets a slap on the wrist (which, for a company like MS, is a $$ fine of any amount). Nothing is gonna happen, its all a joke.
Jesus Christ. And some of you actually wonder _why_ your labeled as geeks! Only geeks would fill the entire message board with pronunciation arguments while ignoring the main issue! "Its the Hamner-Brown Comet" "Noo, Hammer-Brown" "Your both wrong, its Lucifer's Hammer!" BANG. Btw, this 'Linus Torvalds' characters knows not what he is talking about. Its pronounced 'Leen-ooks'. =P
Standard reply of the patent office to patent requests, "Ok". The patent office made a statement a while back basically saying they will 'ok' pretty much everything that comes accross their desk. Its up to the courts to decide if a patent is legal. In other words, if you want to use the idea, you need to go buy yerself a lawyer that can stand up to whatever lawyer Yahoo can afford...
Your missing one _very_ important issue. The network that the files were being shared on was the property of the school.
It wasnt the student's private network in their dorm.
When you are using somebody else's property, you abide by their rules. They made it quite clear that they had the right to search the student's computers. The students agreed to that rule by using the network. No room to complain.
1)...(in short, u said)...not on web, was in shared folders ok.
2)...(in short, u said)...CMU guessed passwords, considered public Not entirely accurate according to their email. They considered 'easily guessed' passwords and those that had passwords in readme files, or were freely given upon request, the same as public access. They did find systems that had mp3s and such, but with better passwords. Those they considered were there for legal, 'private' use.
3)...(in short, u said)... CMU violated their code of ethics No... If you read a little further you would have noticed this line under the 'System Administration' section: "On rare occasions, computing staff may access others' files, but only when strictly necessary for the maintenance of a system or in active pursuit of serious security or abuse incidents." They were well within their rights to search the systems, whether password protected or not. The students have no grounds to complain about anything.
Re:Welcome to RealWorld(tm)
on
NetSlaves
·
· Score: 1
KNOW YOUR RIGHTS...(snip)...no excuse...paying nothing for 60 hour weeks...
Know your status as a salaried exempt, non-exempt, hourly, etc. and check your local and federal laws on the subject. Especially check the laws concerning 'on-call'. In some (most? all?) areas, there are two types of on-call. Those that can say 'no' when you get paged, and those that cant. If you are required to work when you get a call, they are required to pay you a certain number of hours worth of work, evan if it only takes 10 minutes of your time, or your not called at all.
But also check to see if the field your in makes you exempt from those overtime laws. Many technical jobs are. Evan the states and federal government expect those 60 hour weeks.
There are websites out there that can tell you just about everything you need to know. I found a really good one... but I forgot to get the url off my system before I quit my last job. =(
Your right. Companies should infact give little bonus checks to people that point out security holes, or issues or whatever. It would invite more people to check for them and help the company in the long run. However, how people (hackers) go about checking for those security issues is the issue. Trying to pick the lock on your own car is a LOT different than picking the lock on your neighbors car. Just as breaking into your own NT machine is different than breaking into a company's machine.
Your intentions, imo, should not make a difference in the trial, only the sentencing.
How can you be so ignorant? It took me 22 years to get the way I am. But dont worry, I plan to be twice as ignorant by my 44th birthday.
So before you label...(snip)
You obviously have misunderstood my last post... I was not trying to focus on whether or not hackers are criminals. I was focusing on the insanely retarded line saying that the companies that get hacked should be held more responsible for their lack of security.
Lets try a different comparison, shall we? Women who dress in revealing clothing are _asking_ to get raped. It is their fault for not wearing more conservative clothing.
When anybody does something illegal, _they_ are responsible. End of discussion.
I read this sort of thing all the time. Occasionally, I just feel the need to scream. Cant do that at work, so I'll post something
(snip)--: I believe the people who create the encryption and security methods should be held more accountable for weak security.
You are so right. Damn it annoys me that _I_ get blamed if I try to steal a car. Just what are those car manufacturers thinking by not putting in better car alarms? Its all their fault.
Tell me, what is so wrong about 'XORing bytes and considering that the ultimate security'? Better security wouldn't be needed if people wouldn't try to 'crack' software.
When somebody torches your house, ruins your family, gets you fired from your job and tosses you in a homeless shelter, and you _DONT_ press charges, simpy saying "Thank you for showing me how stupid I was for not having a security system that could keep you away from my house.", get back on here and let me know. Until then, just keep deluding yourself with the belief that hackers are heroes.
Slashdot Mirror
>> It's not censorship unless it comes from a >> government agency People everywhere have a serious problem understanding when 'free speech' applies. I remember back in the bbs days people crying when the sysop deleted 'nasty words', phrases or entire posts. They yelled 'censorship' and 'free speech violation'. Just as you have the right to tell somebody not to use nasty words in your house, /. has the right to change the rules and begin editing 'your' posts, the Boy Scouts can fire gay scout masters, and Napster has the right to remove _any_ music for _any_ reason.
If you dont like it, you have the right to remove any software from your computer that promotes the suppression of free speech.
People dont read articles before wailing about them. Their idea is pretty good, except, I didnt see where it said when somebody tries to edit the file, it splits it. Looks to me like it would turn your .cshrc into a symlink, then when you changed it, your friends copy would change as well, without you ever knowing about.
But continuing on to other 'inovations'. Text to speech. Its already been on the MacOS for a while. MS must do most of their 'brainstorming' in front of a line of computers, one running solaris, one running linux, one running macos, etc...
Maybe its just a coincidence, but a Daniel Morales was CEO of @bigger.net. It was a San Jose based isp. One of the first free service providers. I used to work there. The company died back in 1998 do to some... interesting book work. It was believed (by other executive officers, employees and board members) that Daniel, with the help of his friends (the CFO and another officer, both of which he hired himself) pocketed some cash, tanking the company.
From what I understand, the Daniel Morales of bigger.net was the former CEO of Opus Communications as well. Does anybody have any information on whether or not this is the same guy? Or is it just a coincidence, two people with the same name, in the same area, in questionable businesses?
I work for a .com company. We had this very issue as our entire website is dynamically generated with a single C program. It grabs various parts of pages created mostly with php3.
How to index it? Frames. Put a 1 pixel frame at the top of the page. Hardly noticeable, and the search engine sees the frames page, where you can put a whole bunch of comments and meta tags and a tag to get the straight text, depending on the search engine needs.
What I care about is the fact that Gore obviously thinks Microsoft is a wonderful company staffed by great people and run by a real swell guy.
That actually wouldn't bother me too much if it wasnt announced (tv news, last week or so) that the white house would be involved with the DoJ's decision making on what to do with Microsoft.
$5 says MS gets a slap on the wrist (which, for a company like MS, is a $$ fine of any amount). Nothing is gonna happen, its all a joke.
Jesus Christ. And some of you actually wonder _why_ your labeled as geeks! Only geeks would fill the entire message board with pronunciation arguments while ignoring the main issue! "Its the Hamner-Brown Comet" "Noo, Hammer-Brown" "Your both wrong, its Lucifer's Hammer!" BANG. Btw, this 'Linus Torvalds' characters knows not what he is talking about. Its pronounced 'Leen-ooks'. =P
Standard reply of the patent office to patent requests, "Ok".
The patent office made a statement a while back basically saying they will 'ok' pretty much everything that comes accross their desk.
Its up to the courts to decide if a patent is legal. In other words, if you want to use the idea, you need to go buy yerself a lawyer that can stand up to whatever lawyer Yahoo can afford...
It wasnt the student's private network in their dorm.
When you are using somebody else's property, you abide by their rules. They made it quite clear that they had the right to search the student's computers. The students agreed to that rule by using the network. No room to complain.
ok.
2) ...(in short, u said)...CMU guessed passwords, considered public
Not entirely accurate according to their email. They considered 'easily guessed' passwords and those that had passwords in readme files, or were freely given upon request, the same as public access. They did find systems that had mp3s and such, but with better passwords. Those they considered were there for legal, 'private' use.
3) ...(in short, u said)... CMU violated their code of ethics
No... If you read a little further you would have noticed this line under the 'System Administration' section: "On rare occasions, computing staff may access others' files, but only when strictly necessary for the maintenance of a system or in active pursuit of serious security or abuse incidents."
They were well within their rights to search the systems, whether password protected or not. The students have no grounds to complain about anything.
Know your status as a salaried exempt, non-exempt, hourly, etc. and check your local and federal laws on the subject. Especially check the laws concerning 'on-call'. In some (most? all?) areas, there are two types of on-call. Those that can say 'no' when you get paged, and those that cant. If you are required to work when you get a call, they are required to pay you a certain number of hours worth of work, evan if it only takes 10 minutes of your time, or your not called at all.
But also check to see if the field your in makes you exempt from those overtime laws. Many technical jobs are. Evan the states and federal government expect those 60 hour weeks.
There are websites out there that can tell you just about everything you need to know. I found a really good one... but I forgot to get the url off my system before I quit my last job. =(
Your right. Companies should infact give little bonus checks to people that point out security holes, or issues or whatever. It would invite more people to check for them and help the company in the long run. However, how people (hackers) go about checking for those security issues is the issue. Trying to pick the lock on your own car is a LOT different than picking the lock on your neighbors car. Just as breaking into your own NT machine is different than breaking into a company's machine.
Your intentions, imo, should not make a difference in the trial, only the sentencing.
It took me 22 years to get the way I am. But dont worry, I plan to be twice as ignorant by my 44th birthday.
So before you label...(snip)
You obviously have misunderstood my last post... I was not trying to focus on whether or not hackers are criminals. I was focusing on the insanely retarded line saying that the companies that get hacked should be held more responsible for their lack of security.
Lets try a different comparison, shall we? Women who dress in revealing clothing are _asking_ to get raped. It is their fault for not wearing more conservative clothing.
When anybody does something illegal, _they_ are responsible. End of discussion.
(snip)--: I believe the people who create the encryption and security methods should be held more accountable for weak security.
You are so right. Damn it annoys me that _I_ get blamed if I try to steal a car. Just what are those car manufacturers thinking by not putting in better car alarms? Its all their fault.
Tell me, what is so wrong about 'XORing bytes and considering that the ultimate security'? Better security wouldn't be needed if people wouldn't try to 'crack' software.
When somebody torches your house, ruins your family, gets you fired from your job and tosses you in a homeless shelter, and you _DONT_ press charges, simpy saying "Thank you for showing me how stupid I was for not having a security system that could keep you away from my house.", get back on here and let me know. Until then, just keep deluding yourself with the belief that hackers are heroes.