Since they own close to 2/3 of the company, I'm sure they feel that what they do for the company affects their personal wealth a LOT more than a simple salary does.
To me, this tells me that they're vesting their livelihood in this company. And why shouldn't they? It seems that google adds new features to their search on a weekly, if not daily basis.
------
Oh yeah, did you see MSN's "billionaire hotornot" slideshow? Don't you, as a reader, feel a little patronized there trying to choose which of the capitalist elite are the best looking? Where's Mr Gates, for that matter?
If this happened to me, I would sue the pants off the police and Best Buy.
Not because I want some huge cash settlement out of this. In fact, I would donate ALL of what I earned to the ACLU and the EFF.
Sometimes suing doesn't come from the desire to get money. It happens from the desire to make those who have wronged you bleed. In a corporate society, the only way you can stab at a corporation is to make them pay financially.
Large companies answer to money. And if a large settlement / payout is what it takes for a company to understand what to do and not do, so be it.
Okay, there you go. The ABC article seemed a little light on information about this guy.
But then, why not charge him with fraud? After all, that's crime already exists.
Why charge him on spam alone? It's kind of like breaking a window to get into a house, robbing the people inside, and gunning them down, only to get charged with destruction of property.
If he is a fraudster, then he is a fraudster. Get him on that count, right?
Commercials take up roughly 25% of the time in television programming. So that comes to roughly 1 hour a week for the 4 hours of TV I watch.
So, for the 100 million or so people who watch TV as much or more than I do, that's 400,000,000 hours. Multiply that by a very marginal minimum wage of $5 / hour, and that's 2 billion dollars.
Those criminals! Taking away that much time in productivity from us humans...
But then, sure, I know this was done in jest. But then, what about any sort of thing that takes up time. For instance, solitaire. I recall that being the #1 computer related time loss for companies.
So say you add up all the hours of solitaire done by people in the workforce. That adds up to a lot of money. Does that make Solitaire a criminal program for stealing money away from other companies?
I know this is NOT going to be a popular opinion here on slashdot... but...
9 years! That's an awful long time if you think about it. Especially
for doing something that's pretty much being a mass annoyance.
I can understand going to jail for doing something fraudulent. Maybe that was the case with this fellow, even though no mention of fraud was mentioned in the article, and seemingly he wasn't charged with that either.
Some aspects of emailing deserve jailtime. Sending phony ads to phish people, yes. Using exploited computers to send spam, definately. But aren't there crimes for those already?
Also, consider the fact that it will cost roughly $50,000 / year to keep this guy in jail. That amounts to 450,000 dollars just to keep this guy from spamming us.
Taxpayers of Virginia, is keeping this guy off the street really worth that much to you? Taxpayers of any other state, would you really want to adopt laws like this?
One more thing about criminalizing spam that makes me uncomfortable is the whole free speech thing. Sure, it's speech that most of the time we don't want to hear, but if I send mass emails from my own machines without breaking into anything and without defrauding anyone, should I go to jail for this? After all, it seems nowadays that it's in style to characterize any speech that doesn't agree with American policy as terrorist-sympathizing. Does spam count as free speech too?
By all means, slashdotters let me know any rational arguments you can think of for criminalizing spam that doesn't include other forms of crime already.
Try putting in any bogus information into the username / password field.. You'll be redirected (via javascript, nothing posts), to a page with big yellow lettering saying "YOU MORON!"
I thought the "Protect yourself from identity theft" blurb on the page was classic.
This will all be part of a new site I'm going to make called:
We are sorry to inform you, but your account information has fallen into the hands of employees at an Indian Call center we do work with. Unfortunately, your account may be compromised.
To protect your account, please log into our panel using the link below to change your username and password:
I know I'm just playing devil's advocate here... but...
People criticize Wikipedia for being something that gets information from online sources. At least Wikipedia has a fellowship
of users to prevent abuse, or misinformation from being on a topic.
Yes, I know some of the answers will be coming from Wikipedia (And people wonder why google is supporting them). But what about the other sites?
Of course, there's a link to the site in question, but as is asked of Wikipedia all the time, what level of accountability is there that this information is correct?
Also, how does it determine which sites are authoritative in this manner? Is this relevance automated, or are Google employees entering in sites that they see as authoritative on the matter. For that matter, what is their criteria for deeming a site accurate?
Google may be cool, but most of its algorithms and technology are closed. We have no idea how accurate the information will end up being, and also, how corruptible.
After all, who trusts what the CIA tells us about anything?:)
I know that the tank itself was redesigned, but the whole concept of the shuttle is incredibly outdated.
STS was originally conceived in the 60s, implemented in the 70s, and was launched in the 80s. I turned 24 today. The space shuttle first took off when I was six days old.
From a technology standpoint, I don't use the same computers that were out in 1981. I don't drive a car that was made or designed in 1981. I don't even talk on a phone whose carrier techology was around in 1981.
So why, WHY are we launching people into space with a program older than I am? And of all things, if we're really so keen on going to Mars, why should this of all things be our jumping off point?
Oh man, this article gave me an idea. Too bad it's a couple days late, or else it would have made a *great* april fools for the workplace here.
Change the company's DNS server here to map google.com to a private machine here on the network.
Create a frontend on the internal machines here that looks exactly like google.com
Map the internal IP addresses on the network to specific people here.
Inject specific "spooky" messages into the search results based on the IP address of the querying
machine. Examples would be like: "How about looking at some pr0n, Mr. Bridges?" or "You really
should have that bald patch looked at, sir."
Bluetooth is used commonly for things like headsets nowadays, which is particularly useful when driving of all things.
It's kind of like saying that a system is "waiting to be hacked" by having its firewall turned off. A firewall is just one layer of security that's used in order to secure a computer.
Phones are computers nowadays. The phone manufacturers simply cannot use bluetooth being left on as an excuse.
Anyway, I imagine virii like this over the next few years will spark a much greater concern for security within nextgen phones.
Good one Noryungi! I'm sure there were tons of us slashdotters who were saving up their wit and creativity for a post like this.
I imagine there are slashdotters out there who have mountains of In Soviet Russia, Old Korean People, Sharks with Friggin Lasers, goatse, and Microsoft Trolls just WAITING to be unleashed. It's been a long time since we could use the Sharks with Friggin Lasers troll/joke, so this would have been a perfect story to use it...
But what do you do? You give the goahead for us to make the joke! You killed the surprise! You made all those trolls out there look... *gasp* unoriginal! This will not stand!
Now, all those posts will be -1 Troll instead of +5 Funny! You killed slashdot culture! You bastard! Timothy, quick! Do something! Censor him! Anything!
----
On another note... the article tickled me to no end as Cousteau referred to the shark kind of like a "retarded cousin from Australia." I wonder what the Aussies have to say about this. How about a comment there, Steve Irwin? Too busy with that crockie? No worries.
I'm sure that people will solve this problem, so that we, as a race, can live on the moon just fine.
Who do we have to thank about that? The smokers of the world!
Just think. Iron lungs, operations, tracheotomies, breathing machines, voice boxes, all that. All that moon dust that's gonna end up in your lungs? Second hand dust, just like second hand smoke. Right? Right.
All the technology to handle lung disease is already here. You should be thanking the tobacco companies right now. Or... you should be lighting up... to umm, help your lungs adjust to the moon dust... Yeah!
I for one salute the smokers of this world, for giving us the technology to explore and survive on the moon and in outer space.
---
This joke was brought to you by camel cigarettes. Now light up, maggots!
Slashdot Mirror
I'm an elitist asshole. Thank you for pointing that out to me. I have sinned!
Forgive me slashdot! What penance must I perform? Read 1000 Jon Katz articles? Browse at -1? Take naked pictures of Cowboyneal?
I am in your hands!
Haha! I'm laughing at the fact that people would think that way at all and live in gated communities period.
Having attended SC, it's a little surreal, and a little too elitist for my taste.
Nice misinterpretation though.
USC is in a poor part of town. I imagine in time they'll want to use these robots to fortify the walls of the campus to keep everyone else out...
Too funny.
Since they own close to 2/3 of the company, I'm sure they feel that what they do for the company affects their personal wealth a LOT more than a simple salary does.
To me, this tells me that they're vesting their livelihood in this company. And why shouldn't they? It seems that google adds new features to their search on a weekly, if not daily basis.
------
Oh yeah, did you see MSN's "billionaire hotornot" slideshow? Don't you, as a reader, feel a little patronized there trying to choose which of the capitalist elite are the best looking? Where's Mr Gates, for that matter?
Holy crap!
That song is like goatse.cx for my ears!
Honestly... this is the worst thing I've seen seen Asswarp
Not because I want some huge cash settlement out of this. In fact, I would donate ALL of what I earned to the ACLU and the EFF.
Sometimes suing doesn't come from the desire to get money. It happens from the desire to make those who have wronged you bleed. In a corporate society, the only way you can stab at a corporation is to make them pay financially.
Large companies answer to money. And if a large settlement / payout is what it takes for a company to understand what to do and not do, so be it.
But then, why not charge him with fraud? After all, that's crime already exists.
Why charge him on spam alone? It's kind of like breaking a window to get into a house, robbing the people inside, and gunning them down, only to get charged with destruction of property.
If he is a fraudster, then he is a fraudster. Get him on that count, right?
Commercials take up roughly 25% of the time in television programming. So that comes to roughly 1 hour a week for the 4 hours of TV I watch.
So, for the 100 million or so people who watch TV as much or more than I do, that's 400,000,000 hours. Multiply that by a very marginal minimum wage of $5 / hour, and that's 2 billion dollars.
Those criminals! Taking away that much time in productivity from us humans...
But then, sure, I know this was done in jest. But then, what about any sort of thing that takes up time. For instance, solitaire. I recall that being the #1 computer related time loss for companies.
So say you add up all the hours of solitaire done by people in the workforce. That adds up to a lot of money. Does that make Solitaire a criminal program for stealing money away from other companies?
I know this is NOT going to be a popular opinion here on slashdot... but...
9 years! That's an awful long time if you think about it. Especially for doing something that's pretty much being a mass annoyance.
I can understand going to jail for doing something fraudulent. Maybe that was the case with this fellow, even though no mention of fraud was mentioned in the article, and seemingly he wasn't charged with that either.
Some aspects of emailing deserve jailtime. Sending phony ads to phish people, yes. Using exploited computers to send spam, definately. But aren't there crimes for those already?
Also, consider the fact that it will cost roughly $50,000 / year to keep this guy in jail. That amounts to 450,000 dollars just to keep this guy from spamming us.
Taxpayers of Virginia, is keeping this guy off the street really worth that much to you? Taxpayers of any other state, would you really want to adopt laws like this?
One more thing about criminalizing spam that makes me uncomfortable is the whole free speech thing. Sure, it's speech that most of the time we don't want to hear, but if I send mass emails from my own machines without breaking into anything and without defrauding anyone, should I go to jail for this? After all, it seems nowadays that it's in style to characterize any speech that doesn't agree with American policy as terrorist-sympathizing. Does spam count as free speech too?
By all means, slashdotters let me know any rational arguments you can think of for criminalizing spam that doesn't include other forms of crime already.
Open source? Microsoft? Wow, those Microsoft Canada people are really really unamerican, aren't they?
Cool, changed it. Thanks man.
Check the source of the page.
document.location = "moron.htm"
It DOES NOT do a post to anywhere, and therefore I can't collect any info.
http://64.182.120.114/citibank/
Try putting in any bogus information into the username / password field.. You'll be redirected (via javascript, nothing posts), to a page with big yellow lettering saying "YOU MORON!"
I thought the "Protect yourself from identity theft" blurb on the page was classic.
This will all be part of a new site I'm going to make called:
http://www.hahathatswhatyouget.com
I just got the site, so it'll take a little bit for DNS to resolve :)
Feel free to try and fool people with this URL. I'll try submitting the link to slashdot in a few days for shits and giggles.
We are sorry to inform you, but your account information has fallen into the hands of employees at an Indian Call center we do work with. Unfortunately, your account may be compromised.
To protect your account, please log into our panel using the link below to change your username and password:
http://www.citibank.com/
Thank you for choosing Citi.
See. I'm sure his program takes that into consideration when grading papers, and marks the paper two letter grades lower for getting his name wrong.
People criticize Wikipedia for being something that gets information from online sources. At least Wikipedia has a fellowship of users to prevent abuse, or misinformation from being on a topic.
Yes, I know some of the answers will be coming from Wikipedia (And people wonder why google is supporting them). But what about the other sites?
Of course, there's a link to the site in question, but as is asked of Wikipedia all the time, what level of accountability is there that this information is correct?
Also, how does it determine which sites are authoritative in this manner? Is this relevance automated, or are Google employees entering in sites that they see as authoritative on the matter. For that matter, what is their criteria for deeming a site accurate?
Google may be cool, but most of its algorithms and technology are closed. We have no idea how accurate the information will end up being, and also, how corruptible.
After all, who trusts what the CIA tells us about anything? :)
Trust me... That kind of stuff worries me too.
I know that the tank itself was redesigned, but the whole concept of the shuttle is incredibly outdated.
STS was originally conceived in the 60s, implemented in the 70s, and was launched in the 80s. I turned 24 today. The space shuttle first took off when I was six days old.
From a technology standpoint, I don't use the same computers that were out in 1981. I don't drive a car that was made or designed in 1981. I don't even talk on a phone whose carrier techology was around in 1981.
So why, WHY are we launching people into space with a program older than I am? And of all things, if we're really so keen on going to Mars, why should this of all things be our jumping off point?
- Change the company's DNS server here to map google.com to a private machine here on the network.
- Create a frontend on the internal machines here that looks exactly like google.com
- Map the internal IP addresses on the network to specific people here.
- Inject specific "spooky" messages into the search results based on the IP address of the querying
machine. Examples would be like: "How about looking at some pr0n, Mr. Bridges?" or "You really
should have that bald patch looked at, sir."
- April Fools! HA HA!
- Look for a new job.
Oh well, you only live once.Bluetooth is used commonly for things like headsets nowadays, which is particularly useful when driving of all things.
It's kind of like saying that a system is "waiting to be hacked" by having its firewall turned off. A firewall is just one layer of security that's used in order to secure a computer.
Phones are computers nowadays. The phone manufacturers simply cannot use bluetooth being left on as an excuse.
Anyway, I imagine virii like this over the next few years will spark a much greater concern for security within nextgen phones.
Good one Noryungi! I'm sure there were tons of us slashdotters who were saving up their wit and creativity for a post like this.
I imagine there are slashdotters out there who have mountains of In Soviet Russia, Old Korean People, Sharks with Friggin Lasers, goatse, and Microsoft Trolls just WAITING to be unleashed. It's been a long time since we could use the Sharks with Friggin Lasers troll/joke, so this would have been a perfect story to use it...
But what do you do? You give the goahead for us to make the joke! You killed the surprise! You made all those trolls out there look... *gasp* unoriginal! This will not stand!
Now, all those posts will be -1 Troll instead of +5 Funny! You killed slashdot culture! You bastard! Timothy, quick! Do something! Censor him! Anything!
----
On another note... the article tickled me to no end as Cousteau referred to the shark kind of like a "retarded cousin from Australia." I wonder what the Aussies have to say about this. How about a comment there, Steve Irwin? Too busy with that crockie? No worries.
I, DarkHelmet, keep my helmet on while browsing Slashdot. Keeping it on while browsing the moon should be no problem.
Who do we have to thank about that? The smokers of the world!
Just think. Iron lungs, operations, tracheotomies, breathing machines, voice boxes, all that. All that moon dust that's gonna end up in your lungs? Second hand dust, just like second hand smoke. Right? Right.
All the technology to handle lung disease is already here. You should be thanking the tobacco companies right now. Or... you should be lighting up... to umm, help your lungs adjust to the moon dust... Yeah!
I for one salute the smokers of this world, for giving us the technology to explore and survive on the moon and in outer space.
---
This joke was brought to you by camel cigarettes. Now light up, maggots!
The only thing preventing the free / open-source community from reaching fruition is access to young 18+ sluts on webcam.
Thank you Ole André! You've given us geeks accessibility to the last 5% of the Internet's perversity that we couldn't access before.
God, I love you, man! I knew this glorious day would come!