I think when he says slippery slope he is not arguing the guarantee of abuse but the ramifications of the action on future actions. The ISP is acting as a legal body by serving its customers legal documents. Thusly breaking the Client-Service boundary. This can be likened to a person that felt harassed by you requesting that your telephone provider disconnect you because you "harassed" them over the phone. I for one dislike the corporate big brother that this alliance suggests.
Sound like this worm has some significant financial backing. Whats even more crazy is a patch has been sent out for the worm already by Microsoft and people are still having issues.
I don't like the ramifications that this suggests if the search is allowed. The main one is that it is making our children second-class citizens. Schools are the first place people learn how to interact with society. Unfortunately students get detentions on little or no evidence, they are categorized for risk by the people they hangout with, and many rules have cruel or unusually sever punishment. No wonder children have trouble adjusting to fit into society and distrust all authority around them. Our schools are giving them a reason to.
If the last guy was pirating wouldn't management have been wondering why it was costing them nothing. I think this is a really dangerous situation to bring to management cause they probably already know about it and are playing dumb.You need to work on getting management to realize its an issue. If they aren't will, I would definitely start going to budget meeting and demanding budget for software to get everything legit or move off to something OSS. For employee complaints about waiting for software word an answer that makes it sound like they are liable for the software on their computer and they will get quiet really quickly.
I have not read the article, but it sounds like the author of this post is suggesting that google is to blame for data leaks. I think google is an effective tool for indicating data leaks. What stops someone from accessing the data if a web crawler can. I mean the crawl does not have credentials for accessing the data. That means evil people without credentials can access the data. Google just happens to cache it for latter access by evil people.
Lol, its to screw the people that aren't tech savy. The firmware is all over the internet and all you have to do is choose to use that firmware when restoring you ipod touch. I do it every single time. If it was illegal I figure Apple would tell people to stop hosting the firmware images.
I remember a search engine off shoot of yahoo. Their only purpose was making the search results kid friendly. Its not really a censor, but it stops the accidental exposure. I think it was called yahooligans. I don't know if it exists anymore though. If you just made it your daughters home page it would subtly promote safer surfing.
File sharing is not illegal. The distributing of copy-righted material is. Why are so many interest groups making the mistake. Its like making email illegal because it is used for scams. I also have this beef with "piracy". Downloading a file is not anywhere close to murdering and plundering on the high seas!
These people have to be the stupidest people alive. A company doesn't care about performance entirely if they want to promote you to management. They care how you represent the company. If I could churn gorgeous code out, I still only get paid the $65510/year that everyone else does. Management gets paid in around six figures. If your really that good that means you get $35 000 just for putting on a dress shirt and pants every work day. I for one would do that.
Amazon isn't the only one that does this. Apple does this with their products. A lot of printing companies do this with ink cartridges. Car companies often control the supply of replacement parts. Secondary purchases are a huge economy everywhere. I don't like that use of the DMCA, though. Its implications really scare me. What if I modified my car then release the notes on a web page. Could the manufacture DMCA it down? Should this be an acceptable use of the DMCA? I think that DMCA notices should really come with a danger to misuse. If there isn't companies could DMCA their way out of webpages that attack their product. It would really make the company think about it be before it brought down it's huge club of injustice on an individual.
How is this illegal? If it was a copy of an original piece yes. What it seems to be though is that the original piece has been morphed and manipulated into something new and enticing. Yes it did copy parts, but it took them out of context and used them in some new form. This is not copyright infringement in so much as it is fair use.
'feel that the law has no control over them. They just feel that they can go on the streets and do whatever they like.'
If that was true why do they resort to stabbing before trying some shoplifting. It sounds like the guy is abusing his position to push some legislature through. He should step back and ask what is better for the general public. Heavy taxation on an industry or social programs, like sports, clubs, technology competitions, that would get those kids off the street and being more active members of society.
This reminds me of facebooks beacon system in many ways. I did not hate beacon for what it was trying to accomplish. It was how it went about accomplishing this. For starts there should not be any way for a third party to access cookies and read them. The data being read might be private since I don't know exactly what every site stores in their own cookies or what each site is accessing from cookies. Also, this could also be used as a vector for phishing scams to become more personal. I for one delete everything after every session for this reason alone. If this was more transparent then sure I would enjoy this. Secondly, I hate it when people say, "well there is an opt-out". If there has to be an opt-out option it should be an opt-in option because it is impossible for you to notify every single person affected of the changes and allow them to opt-out at their descression.
I think this speaks of a larger problem in how the US government organizes itself. NASA had the same issue with some spaceship components because new people were not trained on how legacy systems were built. This issue is happening through many departments in the US government. The US government's extreme isolationism and disinformation for public forums allows them to be years ahead in technology that could help the general public, but means that the people can't benefit from the technology they fund until it has been independently discovered or rendered a relic by some new technology.
The most powerful argument I have heard for use of surveillance technology is that people that don't break the law should not fear it. The problem is what if the laws change to suit the people in power. We don't need to give the government power that it does not need, but if we need to give them power to protect us it must come at a great cost to them. Regulate the access of the information. Make the process completely transparent. If abuse occurs make the system stop functioning or let the abused go free. It is safe guards like these that ensure the legal system. Why can't it be applied to all government functions.
A patent is supposed to protect a commercial product from being copied by the market. This is to promote people to share their ideas and collaborate while protecting the inventor. Patenting software concepts is counter intuitive to this process where no ingenuity of solving a problem is demonstrated. A lot of the patents that make it though now a days are really abusive of the protection and way to generalized to the technology they use.
I suspect that your manager is threatening you with this because of a project the company wants you to finish. There would be no legal recourse since the manager could word a reference as failing at achieving results or something that is true, but obscuring the truth. I don't know if it is possible in your situation, but a company I worked for had many major ethical issues leaked to the press that convinced the CEO that it was worth her time to provide help. She would willingly answer questions and thank you as well. Try discussing the situation with a higher up in the company. Managers get reviews to. Imagine him getting "threatens and intimidates direct reports" would send a clear message. I would hope companies would smarten up and realize that legal recourse is not the best recourse. When the media wants something to sell and ethical issues always go over well with the public.
This should not be a case of antitrust. The engineers that were on the standards council as part of RAMBUS should lose their right to practice engineering. I don't know how it works in the states, but in Canada it is unethical and against the code of conduct for an engineer not to disclose any benefit that their position might provide. What RAMBUS's engineers did easily demonstrates a breach of conduct.
I think the fact that the patent is part of the standard indicates an even larger issue. Patents are suppose to protect an inventive design from being sold by competition. Patents for things like making a touch screen should not be patents. They do not indicate a design. A implementation for making a touch screen now that should be patentable.
I worked for an IT department for a while and was often installing software on the employees machine. Installing usually occurred when the employee wasn't working so they were never physically there to agree to the EULA. I mean who then would be responsible. Its my job to install the software so I could be viewed as being forced to agree to the EULA and the person using the computer never sees the EULA. The current contract method shouldn't even stand up in court since no one witnessed you signing it. Maybe they will start forcing you agree to it while send them a record over the internet of you doing it. Making you do it every time the program starts would also help...
Someone mentioned be before that the technology hasn't been tested for false positives. I would like to indicate that their system will inherently generate false positives.
A hash is derived from an irreversible function performed on the file that is being transfered. This is often used to test the integrity of transfered data. This would protect against corruption that occurs in the data stream.
The major issue with hashing is that the hash is not a continuous function. Continuous means that for every input there is one output. This means that there could easily be a false positive when a duplicate hash occurs.
The fact the team developing this technology mentions it means they understand there might be false positives means that they understand this limitation and this technology is only a proof of concept.
Microsoft has gotten a large amount of heat for its operating system. In large part due to the number of well crafted viruses that exploit weaknesses in the programming. Apple was long toted to be virus free. That was only due to the obscurity of the system and people's willingness to write viruses for it. I don't think we should bash the quality of Mircosoft's code because anyones code can be full of holes when people work at breaking it. I think Microsoft's issue is updating. Update when the exploit is found not the second Tuesday of the month after the exploit has been abused for a while.
Slashdot Mirror
Your willing to complain online that they censor the chemical names, but too lazy to look the combinations up ONLINE. Are you serious?
Just research Canadian Music Creators Coalition and her name pops up.For those that wont google, They are lobbying against blank cd levies.
I think when he says slippery slope he is not arguing the guarantee of abuse but the ramifications of the action on future actions. The ISP is acting as a legal body by serving its customers legal documents. Thusly breaking the Client-Service boundary. This can be likened to a person that felt harassed by you requesting that your telephone provider disconnect you because you "harassed" them over the phone. I for one dislike the corporate big brother that this alliance suggests.
Sound like this worm has some significant financial backing. Whats even more crazy is a patch has been sent out for the worm already by Microsoft and people are still having issues.
I don't like the ramifications that this suggests if the search is allowed. The main one is that it is making our children second-class citizens. Schools are the first place people learn how to interact with society. Unfortunately students get detentions on little or no evidence, they are categorized for risk by the people they hangout with, and many rules have cruel or unusually sever punishment. No wonder children have trouble adjusting to fit into society and distrust all authority around them. Our schools are giving them a reason to.
If the last guy was pirating wouldn't management have been wondering why it was costing them nothing. I think this is a really dangerous situation to bring to management cause they probably already know about it and are playing dumb.You need to work on getting management to realize its an issue. If they aren't will, I would definitely start going to budget meeting and demanding budget for software to get everything legit or move off to something OSS. For employee complaints about waiting for software word an answer that makes it sound like they are liable for the software on their computer and they will get quiet really quickly.
I have not read the article, but it sounds like the author of this post is suggesting that google is to blame for data leaks. I think google is an effective tool for indicating data leaks. What stops someone from accessing the data if a web crawler can. I mean the crawl does not have credentials for accessing the data. That means evil people without credentials can access the data. Google just happens to cache it for latter access by evil people.
Lol, its to screw the people that aren't tech savy. The firmware is all over the internet and all you have to do is choose to use that firmware when restoring you ipod touch. I do it every single time. If it was illegal I figure Apple would tell people to stop hosting the firmware images.
I remember a search engine off shoot of yahoo. Their only purpose was making the search results kid friendly. Its not really a censor, but it stops the accidental exposure. I think it was called yahooligans. I don't know if it exists anymore though. If you just made it your daughters home page it would subtly promote safer surfing.
File sharing is not illegal. The distributing of copy-righted material is. Why are so many interest groups making the mistake. Its like making email illegal because it is used for scams. I also have this beef with "piracy". Downloading a file is not anywhere close to murdering and plundering on the high seas!
These people have to be the stupidest people alive. A company doesn't care about performance entirely if they want to promote you to management. They care how you represent the company. If I could churn gorgeous code out, I still only get paid the $65510/year that everyone else does. Management gets paid in around six figures. If your really that good that means you get $35 000 just for putting on a dress shirt and pants every work day. I for one would do that.
Amazon isn't the only one that does this. Apple does this with their products. A lot of printing companies do this with ink cartridges. Car companies often control the supply of replacement parts. Secondary purchases are a huge economy everywhere. I don't like that use of the DMCA, though. Its implications really scare me. What if I modified my car then release the notes on a web page. Could the manufacture DMCA it down? Should this be an acceptable use of the DMCA? I think that DMCA notices should really come with a danger to misuse. If there isn't companies could DMCA their way out of webpages that attack their product. It would really make the company think about it be before it brought down it's huge club of injustice on an individual.
How is this illegal? If it was a copy of an original piece yes. What it seems to be though is that the original piece has been morphed and manipulated into something new and enticing. Yes it did copy parts, but it took them out of context and used them in some new form. This is not copyright infringement in so much as it is fair use.
'feel that the law has no control over them. They just feel that they can go on the streets and do whatever they like.'
If that was true why do they resort to stabbing before trying some shoplifting. It sounds like the guy is abusing his position to push some legislature through. He should step back and ask what is better for the general public. Heavy taxation on an industry or social programs, like sports, clubs, technology competitions, that would get those kids off the street and being more active members of society.
This reminds me of facebooks beacon system in many ways. I did not hate beacon for what it was trying to accomplish. It was how it went about accomplishing this. For starts there should not be any way for a third party to access cookies and read them. The data being read might be private since I don't know exactly what every site stores in their own cookies or what each site is accessing from cookies. Also, this could also be used as a vector for phishing scams to become more personal. I for one delete everything after every session for this reason alone. If this was more transparent then sure I would enjoy this. Secondly, I hate it when people say, "well there is an opt-out". If there has to be an opt-out option it should be an opt-in option because it is impossible for you to notify every single person affected of the changes and allow them to opt-out at their descression.
I think this speaks of a larger problem in how the US government organizes itself. NASA had the same issue with some spaceship components because new people were not trained on how legacy systems were built. This issue is happening through many departments in the US government. The US government's extreme isolationism and disinformation for public forums allows them to be years ahead in technology that could help the general public, but means that the people can't benefit from the technology they fund until it has been independently discovered or rendered a relic by some new technology.
If the first thing that comes to mind when reading a patent is duh. Then the patent should not be issued.
The most powerful argument I have heard for use of surveillance technology is that people that don't break the law should not fear it. The problem is what if the laws change to suit the people in power. We don't need to give the government power that it does not need, but if we need to give them power to protect us it must come at a great cost to them. Regulate the access of the information. Make the process completely transparent. If abuse occurs make the system stop functioning or let the abused go free. It is safe guards like these that ensure the legal system. Why can't it be applied to all government functions.
A patent is supposed to protect a commercial product from being copied by the market. This is to promote people to share their ideas and collaborate while protecting the inventor. Patenting software concepts is counter intuitive to this process where no ingenuity of solving a problem is demonstrated. A lot of the patents that make it though now a days are really abusive of the protection and way to generalized to the technology they use.
I suspect that your manager is threatening you with this because of a project the company wants you to finish. There would be no legal recourse since the manager could word a reference as failing at achieving results or something that is true, but obscuring the truth. I don't know if it is possible in your situation, but a company I worked for had many major ethical issues leaked to the press that convinced the CEO that it was worth her time to provide help. She would willingly answer questions and thank you as well. Try discussing the situation with a higher up in the company. Managers get reviews to. Imagine him getting "threatens and intimidates direct reports" would send a clear message. I would hope companies would smarten up and realize that legal recourse is not the best recourse. When the media wants something to sell and ethical issues always go over well with the public.
This should not be a case of antitrust. The engineers that were on the standards council as part of RAMBUS should lose their right to practice engineering. I don't know how it works in the states, but in Canada it is unethical and against the code of conduct for an engineer not to disclose any benefit that their position might provide. What RAMBUS's engineers did easily demonstrates a breach of conduct. I think the fact that the patent is part of the standard indicates an even larger issue. Patents are suppose to protect an inventive design from being sold by competition. Patents for things like making a touch screen should not be patents. They do not indicate a design. A implementation for making a touch screen now that should be patentable.
I worked for an IT department for a while and was often installing software on the employees machine. Installing usually occurred when the employee wasn't working so they were never physically there to agree to the EULA. I mean who then would be responsible. Its my job to install the software so I could be viewed as being forced to agree to the EULA and the person using the computer never sees the EULA. The current contract method shouldn't even stand up in court since no one witnessed you signing it. Maybe they will start forcing you agree to it while send them a record over the internet of you doing it. Making you do it every time the program starts would also help...
Someone mentioned be before that the technology hasn't been tested for false positives. I would like to indicate that their system will inherently generate false positives. A hash is derived from an irreversible function performed on the file that is being transfered. This is often used to test the integrity of transfered data. This would protect against corruption that occurs in the data stream. The major issue with hashing is that the hash is not a continuous function. Continuous means that for every input there is one output. This means that there could easily be a false positive when a duplicate hash occurs. The fact the team developing this technology mentions it means they understand there might be false positives means that they understand this limitation and this technology is only a proof of concept.
Its that fancy thing in the basement called a breaker panel.
Microsoft has gotten a large amount of heat for its operating system. In large part due to the number of well crafted viruses that exploit weaknesses in the programming. Apple was long toted to be virus free. That was only due to the obscurity of the system and people's willingness to write viruses for it. I don't think we should bash the quality of Mircosoft's code because anyones code can be full of holes when people work at breaking it. I think Microsoft's issue is updating. Update when the exploit is found not the second Tuesday of the month after the exploit has been abused for a while.