This just made me think: what if the conficker authors came forward to press charges under the DMCA for reverse engineering their code? Would they have a legal case against the white hats?
Besides the Vietnam debacle, let's take a look at some of the other accomplishments of the proud babyboomer generation:
- WTC attacks '93, '01 - War in Iraq, Afghanistan - Dot com bubble - Subprime housing crisis - Unsustainable social security debt (enjoy that summer home in Florida financed by your children and their children)
This is just the top 5. There is much more that the babyboomer generation should be ashamed of (see also W. Clinton, G.W. Bush). Sure, other generations have left unenviable legacies, but none compares to the mess left by the self serving babyboomers.
You wrote, "I suggest that if a great number of your users are using email as a file storage system that you as a diligent IT guy should spend some time figuring out ways to make it work for them."
Your opinion neglects the fact that gigabyte sized email accounts total up to terabyte sized email stores. Backup and restore times for such large databases are unreasonable. Hardware costs are increased.
Sure it is possible to mitigate these factors, but your one sided view is not healthy for the user base or the IT staff.
Why don't you take your elitest attitude and shove it up your ass. I think it is your utter arrogance is on display here. Try being a little more polite and less condescending.
Are you trying to say that in NZ, Democrats are called Republicans? If so, I'm quite sure you are incorrect. If not, it is not clear at all what you are trying to get across except your inferiority complex.
"Everyone's acting like they met up in a dark alley and handed over a fat envelope stuffed with cash and discussed how best to sabotage Linux. They didn't. It was a perfectly legitimate business deal between two companies."
If this letter is legitimate, Microsoft, a convicted monopolist, tried to weaken its closest competitor by making a private deal with SCO to initiate a frivolous lawsuit. That doesn't sound too legitimate.
"There are too many disparate systems for Average Joe to figure out what they do, let alone how to fix them when they go awry/get upgraded."
Perhaps you haven't tried a current distribution in a while? You are propagating a stereotype. Mandrake, Redhat and many others provide easy to use desktop operating systems that do not take advanced knowledge to maintain.
George
A. Enforcement Authority
1. The Plaintiffs shall have exclusive responsibility for enforcing this Final
Judgment. Without in any way limiting the sovereign enforcement authority of
each of the plaintiff States, the plaintiff States shall form a committee to
coordinate their enforcement of this Final Judgment. A plaintiff State shall take
no action to enforce this Final Judgment without first consulting the plaintiff
States' enforcement committee.
2. To determine and enforce compliance with this Final Judgment, duly authorized
representatives of the plaintiff States, on reasonable notice to Microsoft and
subject to any lawful privilege, shall be permitted the following:
a. Access during normal office hours to inspect any and all source code,
books, ledgers, accounts, correspondence, memoranda and other
documents and records in the possession, custody, or control of Microsoft,
which may have counsel present, regarding any matters contained in this
Final Judgment.
b. Subject to the reasonable convenience of Microsoft and without restraint
or interference from it, to interview, informally or on the record, officers,
employees, or agents of Microsoft, who may have counsel present,
regarding any matters contained in this Final Judgment.
c. Upon written request of a duly designated representative of a plaintiff
State, on reasonable notice given to Microsoft, Microsoft shall submit
such written reports under oath as requested regarding any matters
contained in this Final Judgment.
Individual plaintiff States will consult with the plaintiff States' enforcement committee to
minimize the duplication and burden of the exercise of the foregoing powers, where practicable.
3. The Plaintiffs shall not disclose any information or documents obtained from
Microsoft under this Final Judgment except for the purpose of securing
compliance with this Final Judgment, in a legal proceeding to which one or more
of the Plaintiffs is a party, or as otherwise required by law; provided that the
relevant Plaintiff(s) must provide ten days' advance notice to Microsoft before
disclosing in any legal proceeding (other than a grand jury proceeding) to which
Microsoft is not a party any information or documents provided by Microsoft
pursuant to this Final Judgment which Microsoft has identified in writing as
9
material as to which a claim of protection may be asserted under Rule 26(c)(7) of
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
4. The Plaintiffs shall have the authority to seek such orders as are necessary from
the Court to enforce this Final Judgment, provided, however, that the Plaintiffs
shall afford Microsoft a reasonable opportunity to cure alleged violations of
Sections III.C, III.D, III.E and III.H, provided further that any action by Microsoft
to cure any such violation shall not be a defense to enforcement with respect to
any knowing, willful or systematic violations.
:0
* ^Content-Type:.*multipart/mixed;
{
:0 B
* ^Content-Disposition:.*$.*\.DOC
* ^Content-Type:.*$.*\.DOC
| (formail -r -I"Precedence: junk" \
-A"X-Loop: your@own.mail.address"; \
echo "You sent the attachment in MS Word format,"; \
echo "a secret proprietary format, so I cannot"; \
echo "read it. If you send me the plain text, "; \
echo "HTML or PDF, then I could read it."; \
echo "--"; cat $HOME/.signature \
) | $SENDMAIL -oi -t
}
Gartner recommended that managers train employees to use e-mail more efficiently, including using distribution lists with caution by sending e-mail to only those who need the information or avoid sending needless responses, such as "I'm with you 100 percent" or "Glad to be of help." Gartner also said chat rooms, bulletin boards and instant messaging can prove to be more efficient than e-mail when employees are working in teams.
I'm not so sure I agree that short 'thank you' or acknowledgement email is really that harmful. After all, how long does it take to read one line and click delete.
You said, "Frankly I don't think thats your decision to make. Or this company's. You have no idea what the context of the message was, what the context of this case is, or anything else."
You should read the article, it says, "a message saying, in less-polite terms, `Tell your husband that I want to f-- your brains out, you slut, while he watches'.
Then you say, "Then it becomes an actual case where the government says 'Help them' and they still say 'no'. No longer their ethical choice to make, no longer OK".
The government does not have absolute authority. We the people are the government, remember? That's why it went to court! As you see, the courts made the right decision and upheld the first amendment. This is definately something to "get our panties in a wad over". Any time I have my rights taken away, I take it very seriously.
Couldn't one 'tweak' the cookie to defeat the biased pricing scheme. Something like, "insert these values into your cookie and you'll be guaranteed the lowest prices available"!
It is only a matter of time before Amazon's preferences are uncovered. Just watch out for the ensuing lawsuit.
This comment is a prime example of the devastating effects of a monopoly power. The poster refers to 'taking open protocols and making it incompatible with non-microsoft products' as "unfortunate"! I see this as more of a problem. When a company uses its overwhelming market position to force upgrades and promote sales, it is indeed unfortunate, but also a crime.
Hiding this activity under a thin cover of copyright and trade-secrets is another slap in the face.
I disagree with your opinion. All of these questions have to do directly with the matter at hand. Slashdot's servers do contain 'copyrighted' material, but how valid is the copyright on this embraced-and-extended standard?
Furthermore, Slashdot has said many times that this is their "official policy". The first amendment offers free speech. Why should that be overturned based on the format of that speech?? Even if a court decides this material protected by copyright, it is not the obligation of/. to perform censorship.
Ya, Slashdot doesn't really have a traditional legal team. They just post a few relevant articles and use the top 10 moderated comments as legal defence (AKA open source litigation).
Well I, for one, am tired of hearing Corel bashing. People constantly complain about the poor quality of their software and business decisions. I don't know anything about Corel's apparently troubled past, but I do know Corel Linux is a very decent product. Furthermore, Word Perfect on Corel Linux is sweet. I can honestly say I do not use MSWord anymore.
After running Corel Linux 1.1.2 for almost one year, I can testify that it is stable, fast and easy. It has all of the benefits of the Debian release in addition to a very nice graphical installer, an impressive user interface and all of the applications I need.
I think it is ironic that a company finally puts together a solid Linux product that my mother can (literally) use and the hardcore/. constantly flames it.
The main point is that open source applications are superior to proprietary apps. No one is being cocky and saying that Linux systems are immune to viruses. And of course when Outlook is hit by a major virus, the whole Internet community will be effected. After all, Outlook probably runs on 60% of all desktops. This article does not "make fun" of MS, it just illustrates one of the serious drawbacks of proprietary software engineering.
The point of the matter is, "real reason Linux users are immune is because they don't live in a world where their clients are automatically standardized on whatever Microsoft delivers -- in this case, Outlook. Linux administrators and users care more about Internet standards than Microsoft standards".
Basically, monopoly operating system vendors are inferior and it is good to see CNN spreading the word.
Well I see this as a system for true democracy. If enough people want a document, photo or song, they will have it. If many people think certain material is disgusting, it will not stay present in the system.
Is this not ideal democracy? Instead of pieces published for monetary or political reasons, it will be dictated by the will of the people.
In the face of such an noble, revolutionary idea, hacked degrees are not very concerning. The state of web security today precludes 99% of 'hackers' from being malicious. The 1% smart enough to hack an online university of this scope probably (a) already has their degree or (b) does not have enough time for degree hacking. Furthermore, fake degrees are widely used today and people who fake education are usually spotted in a short time.
I disagree with the idea that "little will come of this". The concept of online universities is very young and underdeveloped. As we develop more technology towards this goal and more education centers are created, it is probable that universities will move away from the old educational model. This process will, "make the ones that are already there better".
By the way, what makes you so happy about getting your degree handed to you by a *living* dean? I do not understand the benefit.
Perhaps you are missing Mr. Saylor's point. I have read the article and there is no mention of this institution replacing the traditional education system. Yes, there is more to school then what you could get from a web page, but no one thinks the web is going to replace school (at this point in time).
What the idea does promise is free information (education?) from the world's foremost authorities for use by the world's entire population. This 'university' will enable college students to supplement their college experience as well as enable those who cannot afford college to become educated.
A "genius knowledge bank" is now possible due to advancements in information technology and should not be dismissed by conservative thinkers. Instead of dwelling on all of the reasons this won't work, let's focus on how we can help to make this a reality.
Maybe it is not the quality of game content that has declined, but rather you have become spoiled by the quantity of good gaming software. Look at the younger game playing generation... they become totally immersed when playing StarCraft, Quake III, etc. With these 'new' classics, you use both your brain and reflexes.
Slashdot Mirror
Here's the proposal:
http://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/2013/33-9470.pdf
Those with constructive comments should submit them to the SEC. Here:
http://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed.shtml
This just made me think: what if the conficker authors came forward to press charges under the DMCA for reverse engineering their code? Would they have a legal case against the white hats?
Do we really need another "War on X"?
Besides the Vietnam debacle, let's take a look at some of the other accomplishments of the proud babyboomer generation:
- WTC attacks '93, '01
- War in Iraq, Afghanistan
- Dot com bubble
- Subprime housing crisis
- Unsustainable social security debt (enjoy that summer home in Florida financed by your children and their children)
This is just the top 5. There is much more that the babyboomer generation should be ashamed of (see also W. Clinton, G.W. Bush). Sure, other generations have left unenviable legacies, but none compares to the mess left by the self serving babyboomers.
You have no right to anonymity. And if you think you are anonymous when surfing the net at work or home, you are sorely mistaken.
You wrote, "I suggest that if a great number of your users are using email as a file storage system that you as a diligent IT guy should spend some time figuring out ways to make it work for them."
Your opinion neglects the fact that gigabyte sized email accounts total up to terabyte sized email stores. Backup and restore times for such large databases are unreasonable. Hardware costs are increased.
Sure it is possible to mitigate these factors, but your one sided view is not healthy for the user base or the IT staff.
Regards.
Why don't you take your elitest attitude and shove it up your ass. I think it is your utter arrogance is on display here. Try being a little more polite and less condescending.
Are you trying to say that in NZ, Democrats are called Republicans? If so, I'm quite sure you are incorrect. If not, it is not clear at all what you are trying to get across except your inferiority complex.
G
"Everyone's acting like they met up in a dark alley and handed over a fat envelope stuffed with cash and discussed how best to sabotage Linux. They didn't. It was a perfectly legitimate business deal between two companies."
If this letter is legitimate, Microsoft, a convicted monopolist, tried to weaken its closest competitor by making a private deal with SCO to initiate a frivolous lawsuit. That doesn't sound too legitimate.
"There are too many disparate systems for Average Joe to figure out what they do, let alone how to fix them when they go awry/get upgraded."
Perhaps you haven't tried a current distribution in a while? You are propagating a stereotype. Mandrake, Redhat and many others provide easy to use desktop operating systems that do not take advanced knowledge to maintain. George
Who will enforce it?
...
See section IV from the ruling:
IV. Compliance and Enforcement Procedures
A. Enforcement Authority
1. The Plaintiffs shall have exclusive responsibility for enforcing this Final Judgment. Without in any way limiting the sovereign enforcement authority of each of the plaintiff States, the plaintiff States shall form a committee to coordinate their enforcement of this Final Judgment. A plaintiff State shall take no action to enforce this Final Judgment without first consulting the plaintiff States' enforcement committee.
2. To determine and enforce compliance with this Final Judgment, duly authorized representatives of the plaintiff States, on reasonable notice to Microsoft and subject to any lawful privilege, shall be permitted the following: a. Access during normal office hours to inspect any and all source code, books, ledgers, accounts, correspondence, memoranda and other documents and records in the possession, custody, or control of Microsoft, which may have counsel present, regarding any matters contained in this Final Judgment. b. Subject to the reasonable convenience of Microsoft and without restraint or interference from it, to interview, informally or on the record, officers, employees, or agents of Microsoft, who may have counsel present, regarding any matters contained in this Final Judgment. c. Upon written request of a duly designated representative of a plaintiff State, on reasonable notice given to Microsoft, Microsoft shall submit such written reports under oath as requested regarding any matters contained in this Final Judgment. Individual plaintiff States will consult with the plaintiff States' enforcement committee to minimize the duplication and burden of the exercise of the foregoing powers, where practicable.
3. The Plaintiffs shall not disclose any information or documents obtained from Microsoft under this Final Judgment except for the purpose of securing compliance with this Final Judgment, in a legal proceeding to which one or more of the Plaintiffs is a party, or as otherwise required by law; provided that the relevant Plaintiff(s) must provide ten days' advance notice to Microsoft before disclosing in any legal proceeding (other than a grand jury proceeding) to which Microsoft is not a party any information or documents provided by Microsoft pursuant to this Final Judgment which Microsoft has identified in writing as 9 material as to which a claim of protection may be asserted under Rule 26(c)(7) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
4. The Plaintiffs shall have the authority to seek such orders as are necessary from the Court to enforce this Final Judgment, provided, however, that the Plaintiffs shall afford Microsoft a reasonable opportunity to cure alleged violations of Sections III.C, III.D, III.E and III.H, provided further that any action by Microsoft to cure any such violation shall not be a defense to enforcement with respect to any knowing, willful or systematic violations.
PATH=/usr/local/bin:/usr/bin:/bin:/sbin
MAILDIR=$HOME/Mail
LOGFILE=$HOME/.procmail.log
SHELL=/bin/bash
VERBOSE=on
:0
* ^Content-Type:.*multipart/mixed;
{
:0 B
* ^Content-Disposition:.*$.*\.DOC
* ^Content-Type:.*$.*\.DOC
| (formail -r -I"Precedence: junk" \
-A"X-Loop: your@own.mail.address"; \
echo "You sent the attachment in MS Word format,"; \
echo "a secret proprietary format, so I cannot"; \
echo "read it. If you send me the plain text, "; \
echo "HTML or PDF, then I could read it."; \
echo "--"; cat $HOME/.signature \
) | $SENDMAIL -oi -t
}
Gartner recommended that managers train employees to use e-mail more efficiently, including using distribution lists with caution by sending e-mail to only those who need the information or avoid sending needless responses, such as "I'm with you 100 percent" or "Glad to be of help." Gartner also said chat rooms, bulletin boards and instant messaging can prove to be more efficient than e-mail when employees are working in teams.
I'm not so sure I agree that short 'thank you' or acknowledgement email is really that harmful. After all, how long does it take to read one line and click delete.
Not only that, but he's offering to sell Internet2 on his site.
You said, "Frankly I don't think thats your decision to make. Or this company's. You have no idea what the context of the message was, what the context of this case is, or anything else."
You should read the article, it says, "a message saying, in less-polite terms, `Tell your husband that I want to f-- your brains out, you slut, while he watches'.
Then you say, "Then it becomes an actual case where the government says 'Help them' and they still say 'no'. No longer their ethical choice to make, no longer OK".
The government does not have absolute authority. We the people are the government, remember? That's why it went to court! As you see, the courts made the right decision and upheld the first amendment. This is definately something to "get our panties in a wad over". Any time I have my rights taken away, I take it very seriously.
Couldn't one 'tweak' the cookie to defeat the biased pricing scheme. Something like, "insert these values into your cookie and you'll be guaranteed the lowest prices available"!
It is only a matter of time before Amazon's preferences are uncovered. Just watch out for the ensuing lawsuit.
This comment is a prime example of the devastating effects of a monopoly power. The poster refers to 'taking open protocols and making it incompatible with non-microsoft products' as "unfortunate"! I see this as more of a problem. When a company uses its overwhelming market position to force upgrades and promote sales, it is indeed unfortunate, but also a crime.
Hiding this activity under a thin cover of copyright and trade-secrets is another slap in the face.
I disagree with your opinion. All of these questions have to do directly with the matter at hand. Slashdot's servers do contain 'copyrighted' material, but how valid is the copyright on this embraced-and-extended standard?
/. to perform censorship.
Furthermore, Slashdot has said many times that this is their "official policy". The first amendment offers free speech. Why should that be overturned based on the format of that speech?? Even if a court decides this material protected by copyright, it is not the obligation of
Ya, Slashdot doesn't really have a traditional legal team. They just post a few relevant articles and use the top 10 moderated comments as legal defence (AKA open source litigation).
Well I, for one, am tired of hearing Corel bashing. People constantly complain about the poor quality of their software and business decisions. I don't know anything about Corel's apparently troubled past, but I do know Corel Linux is a very decent product. Furthermore, Word Perfect on Corel Linux is sweet. I can honestly say I do not use MSWord anymore.
/. constantly flames it.
:(
After running Corel Linux 1.1.2 for almost one year, I can testify that it is stable, fast and easy. It has all of the benefits of the Debian release in addition to a very nice graphical installer, an impressive user interface and all of the applications I need.
I think it is ironic that a company finally puts together a solid Linux product that my mother can (literally) use and the hardcore
Tough crowd
Maybe the problem is with WINE. Try running WP on Corel Linux. It works like a charm!
;)
I have been using Corel OS and Office for almost a year and I will never go back. It handles Word documents better than Word
The main point is that open source applications are superior to proprietary apps. No one is being cocky and saying that Linux systems are immune to viruses. And of course when Outlook is hit by a major virus, the whole Internet community will be effected. After all, Outlook probably runs on 60% of all desktops. This article does not "make fun" of MS, it just illustrates one of the serious drawbacks of proprietary software engineering.
The point of the matter is, "real reason Linux users are immune is because they don't live in a world where their clients are automatically standardized on whatever Microsoft delivers -- in this case, Outlook. Linux administrators and users care more about Internet standards than Microsoft standards".
Basically, monopoly operating system vendors are inferior and it is good to see CNN spreading the word.
Well I see this as a system for true democracy. If enough people want a document, photo or song, they will have it. If many people think certain material is disgusting, it will not stay present in the system.
Is this not ideal democracy? Instead of pieces published for monetary or political reasons, it will be dictated by the will of the people.
In the face of such an noble, revolutionary idea, hacked degrees are not very concerning. The state of web security today precludes 99% of 'hackers' from being malicious. The 1% smart enough to hack an online university of this scope probably (a) already has their degree or (b) does not have enough time for degree hacking. Furthermore, fake degrees are widely used today and people who fake education are usually spotted in a short time.
I disagree with the idea that "little will come of this". The concept of online universities is very young and underdeveloped. As we develop more technology towards this goal and more education centers are created, it is probable that universities will move away from the old educational model. This process will, "make the ones that are already there better".
By the way, what makes you so happy about getting your degree handed to you by a *living* dean? I do not understand the benefit.
Perhaps you are missing Mr. Saylor's point. I have read the article and there is no mention of this institution replacing the traditional education system. Yes, there is more to school then what you could get from a web page, but no one thinks the web is going to replace school (at this point in time).
What the idea does promise is free information (education?) from the world's foremost authorities for use by the world's entire population. This 'university' will enable college students to supplement their college experience as well as enable those who cannot afford college to become educated.
A "genius knowledge bank" is now possible due to advancements in information technology and should not be dismissed by conservative thinkers. Instead of dwelling on all of the reasons this won't work, let's focus on how we can help to make this a reality.
Maybe it is not the quality of game content that has declined, but rather you have become spoiled by the quantity of good gaming software. Look at the younger game playing generation... they become totally immersed when playing StarCraft, Quake III, etc. With these 'new' classics, you use both your brain and reflexes.