My guess is that it has nothing to do with online privacy and everything with vanity. Se began to enjoy the attention too much and started speaking to the press 'off the record'. Doogan is a former journalist and only needed to speak to the right colleague to track her down.
Well that's a shame because not every artist likes to perform live (or are they good at it). Some people are just great at making music - for example the Beatles who never played most of their music live.
Yeah it is. A cloud service requires more trust in one provider but offers far more efficiency than requiring trust in multiple providers (e.g. my colo, cisco, netapp,redhat,etc..) A successful business has to be able to balance mitigating risk with trusting providers.
So.. while you are interviewing admins and auditing code everyone else is busy making money. Guess who is still in business in 5 years?
You don't exactly say what the tech level of your customers are but I'd suggest:
1. First tell them it is a great question. Explain to them that your company is very serious about security and they should always feel comfortable asking any question about your architecture, methods,etc..
2. Explain one of the reasons you use Linux is because of your concerns about their security.
3. Be able to link/show them the percentage of infected windows computers compared to Linux. This link should be from a highly reputable news source. (e.g. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/17/technology/17virus.htmll) This is the only stat they need to see.
4. Avoid any evangelism about open source. Most likely they don't care, they want a solution and a provider they can trust.
5. Finally take this as an opportunity to build a better relationship with your customer. The fact that they called you rather than switching providers means they *want* to trust you. Leave them with the feeling that they can.
Why don't we pick more philosophically neutral terminology, like, "murdering... is destructive" or "murdering... is wasteful?" Those are words that everyone can understand. "EVIL," on the other hand, is a subjective idea that lacks a commonly-held operational definition.
Yes lets save the word 'evil' for things that everyone can understand... like DRM and Microsoft. Evil!!!
Explain in terms of managing risk is the best way to communicate to non software folks about your needs. No shortage of books on risk management and software as good starting point.
That said, you might find management is quite comfortable with the current level of risk. Most young companies have sacrificed software quality to get to market (and have been succesfull doing so).
Default allow means you're open for abuse. Doesn't matter that there's only 1 bad app (right now). Could be thousands next month.
No it doesn't. The set of installed applications on the phone is known. The allow/deny is a subset of that and can be inferred no matter which set is pulled from the server. The only question is which set to pull, e.g. the one that sends the least data.
There are currently 2000+ iphone applications. When polling a server should you a) return a list of 1999 good applications, or b) return a list of the 1 bad application...
How about if an application on your phone wants to locate you? Perhaps the iphone should call home to say https://iphone-services.apple.com/clbl/unauthorizedApps before it allows applications know exactly where you are...
That you spend time downloading songs for your pleasure shows that they have much more value than you want to pay for it. So yes, you want to enjoy the creative works of others for free.
BSD? no, Microsoft is not referring to government code. In their 10-k they identify the open source business model as a competitive threat. They make no claims that the open source biz model is infringing on their IP. What they say is that products mimic their features (i.e. samba) results in reduced sales etc..
I read the article. They wanted him to change his verizon email address. They were fine with giving him dsl service, etc..
Most likely it was a problem because some programmer hard coded a prof filter in email creation.
Nothing wrong with Skype, it is by far one of the best solutions available. Anyone who has actually dealt with sip and nat knows it is a complete mess. Skype also has an excellent set of codecs that can provide superior audio quality but also handle packet loss/jitter etc..
Copyright is 'eurocentric' because europeans invented the printing press, which started copyright laws. No other society in history could produce works w/o a scribe.
Also, there was no such thing has mass-copied in ancient rome. Slaves did the copying by hand.
Oh and the rest of the world understands the concept of copyright, especially the creators themselves.
2. Viacom claims that YouTube built their business around stolen content (in particular Viacom's content). Whether YouTube's success is from cats doing funny stuff or copyrighted material is a big deal. They are not interested in suing or scaring you when they can prove damages against a multi billion dollar company.
Try the golden rule: You respect the terms the of creators because you want people to respect the terms you make for your creations.
Assuming you create anything of course.
oh you mean flickr? facebook? etc... I am no fan of php but once when I hear someone say how only such and such frameworks scale I know I am talking to a lightweight.
It's not an absolute issue for publishers. Successful copy protection mitigates theft, doesn't try to prevent it. Last I checked the game industry is doing quite well with their schemes.
Slashdot Mirror
My guess is that it has nothing to do with online privacy and everything with vanity. Se began to enjoy the attention too much and started speaking to the press 'off the record'. Doogan is a former journalist and only needed to speak to the right colleague to track her down.
Well that's a shame because not every artist likes to perform live (or are they good at it). Some people are just great at making music - for example the Beatles who never played most of their music live.
>> Is that so wrong?
Yeah it is. A cloud service requires more trust in one provider but offers far more efficiency than requiring trust in multiple providers (e.g. my colo, cisco, netapp,redhat,etc..) A successful business has to be able to balance mitigating risk with trusting providers.
So.. while you are interviewing admins and auditing code everyone else is busy making money. Guess who is still in business in 5 years?
You don't exactly say what the tech level of your customers are but I'd suggest:
1. First tell them it is a great question. Explain to them that your company is very serious about security and they should always feel comfortable asking any question about your architecture, methods,etc..
2. Explain one of the reasons you use Linux is because of your concerns about their security.
3. Be able to link/show them the percentage of infected windows computers compared to Linux. This link should be from a highly reputable news source. (e.g. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/17/technology/17virus.htmll) This is the only stat they need to see.
4. Avoid any evangelism about open source. Most likely they don't care, they want a solution and a provider they can trust.
5. Finally take this as an opportunity to build a better relationship with your customer. The fact that they called you rather than switching providers means they *want* to trust you. Leave them with the feeling that they can.
hmm, wouldn't the nuclear scenario would be more about the lack of fitness of non-superstitious types? e.g. physicists?
Why don't we pick more philosophically neutral terminology, like, "murdering ... is destructive" or "murdering ... is wasteful?" Those are words that everyone can understand. "EVIL," on the other hand, is a subjective idea that lacks a commonly-held operational definition.
Yes lets save the word 'evil' for things that everyone can understand... like DRM and Microsoft. Evil!!!
Explain in terms of managing risk is the best way to communicate to non software folks about your needs. No shortage of books on risk management and software as good starting point.
That said, you might find management is quite comfortable with the current level of risk. Most young companies have sacrificed software quality to get to market (and have been succesfull doing so).
Default allow means you're open for abuse. Doesn't matter that there's only 1 bad app (right now). Could be thousands next month.
No it doesn't. The set of installed applications on the phone is known. The allow/deny is a subset of that and can be inferred no matter which set is pulled from the server. The only question is which set to pull, e.g. the one that sends the least data.
There are currently 2000+ iphone applications. When polling a server should you a) return a list of 1999 good applications, or b) return a list of the 1 bad application...
How about if an application on your phone wants to locate you? Perhaps the iphone should call home to say https://iphone-services.apple.com/clbl/unauthorizedApps before it allows applications know exactly where you are...
That you spend time downloading songs for your pleasure shows that they have much more value than you want to pay for it. So yes, you want to enjoy the creative works of others for free.
BSD? no, Microsoft is not referring to government code. In their 10-k they identify the open source business model as a competitive threat. They make no claims that the open source biz model is infringing on their IP. What they say is that products mimic their features (i.e. samba) results in reduced sales etc..
I read the article. They wanted him to change his verizon email address. They were fine with giving him dsl service, etc.. Most likely it was a problem because some programmer hard coded a prof filter in email creation.
Nothing wrong with Skype, it is by far one of the best solutions available. Anyone who has actually dealt with sip and nat knows it is a complete mess. Skype also has an excellent set of codecs that can provide superior audio quality but also handle packet loss/jitter etc..
Your unable to understand what people want and enjoy. Thats why your upset.
Copyright is 'eurocentric' because europeans invented the printing press, which started copyright laws. No other society in history could produce works w/o a scribe.
Also, there was no such thing has mass-copied in ancient rome. Slaves did the copying by hand.
Oh and the rest of the world understands the concept of copyright, especially the creators themselves.
You mean human societies have not had distinct gender roles for millions of years? And you do think humans adapted to better fit those roles?
Our physical differences alone show that the sexes have adapted to do different things. Evolution doesn't care about your dreams of gender equality.
And why would men and women have the same interests? What biological basis is there for that?
This gets a +5?
1. SouthParkStudios content is owned by Viacom.
2. Viacom claims that YouTube built their business around stolen content (in particular Viacom's content). Whether YouTube's success is from cats doing funny stuff or copyrighted material is a big deal. They are not interested in suing or scaring you when they can prove damages against a multi billion dollar company.
3. Infiltrated by scientologists?
you completely missed the point.
Then I would imagine you have loss all sense of self and achieved nirvana. congrats :)
Distribution is very complicated and they incur a very high risk. Thats why developers (and bands) are happy to sign their life away to them.
Try the golden rule: You respect the terms the of creators because you want people to respect the terms you make for your creations.
Assuming you create anything of course.
oh you mean flickr? facebook? etc... I am no fan of php but once when I hear someone say how only such and such frameworks scale I know I am talking to a lightweight.
It's not an absolute issue for publishers. Successful copy protection mitigates theft, doesn't try to prevent it. Last I checked the game industry is doing quite well with their schemes.