More to the point it removes the entire point of white-box reverse engineering. Remember when Compaq reverse-engineered the IBM bios chip, creating the first IBM-compatibles? Q-Dos was recreated from the published manuals of CP/M.
If Oracle thinks they want to win this fight this way, they haven't thought how many principles of simple databases they have implemented that would fall under this concept.
It's not like people aren't trained to read legal papers . . .
Oh, wait, that kind of training takes 8 years and $100,000 dollars. People actually *aren't* trained to read and interpret legal papers, that might be why corporations hire lawyers to create contracts in which important legal information is hidden on other papers not made available at the time of the signing of the contract, completely ignoring the concept documented under the Uniform Commercial Code saying that a contract involves coming to a 'meeting of the minds'.
Sorry - I'd have to say this should be brought to a court. A contract does involve a meeting of the minds, and the company *knew* this addenda was entirely relevant to that meeting of the minds and took positive steps to hide that fact.
"In criminal law, a fraud is an intentional deception made for personal gain or to damage another individual; the related adjective is fraudulent. The specific legal definition varies by legal jurisdiction. Fraud is a crime, and also a civil law violation."
As a potential member of a jury pool, does putting such relevant information in a document not available at the time of the signing of the contract strike you as being either accidental or forthcoming?
Yes but the point is that (barring quantum machines) adding length (y) increases the permutations (and thus the size of the search space) at a far greater speed than adding characters (x). It also happens to be much for a human being to do rather than pulling out esoteric unicode characters that may or may not be legal characters in a given system.
Two other observations - A) the Democrat that's not bought by corporate sector 'X' will actually go toe to toe with the Democrat whose state depends on that sector, and B) even the Democrat that is under corporate influence becomes independent when things have *obviously* gotten out of hand - as an example witness the Dodd Frank act.
From the viewpoint of the corporate lobbyist Republicans have the 'virtue' that they stay bought and stick together no matter what.
Step 1) Conservative voters fight tooth and nail to get people that espouse certain libertarian/objectivist/fundie christian philosophies elected to office/appointed to lifelong judicial positions.
Step 2) These people do . ..exactly what the philosophies they espoused implied they would do. The results are entirely predictable, devastating to the economy, destructive to the environment, creating about one millionaire for every few thousand people it drives into poverty.
Step 3a) Conservatives explain these people were never really conservative . . . Step 3b) and anyway these sudden recent catastrophic results are actually because of liberal policies put into place decades ago that have never caused problems before.
Things to remember - password difficulty is based on x^y, where x is the number of possible characters and y is the password length. Increasing password length is *always* going to be more effective than increasing the mix of characters (indeed the point of a dictionary attack is to reduce can be thought of as reducing 96^8 8 character passwords to a mere 250,000^1).
Each additional alphanumeric character increases the search space by a factor of 62 - a two word password is still only 250,000^2, a password of ten random lowercase characters is 26^10, a *much* larger number.
Moores law says processing power doubles ~18 months. Every new lowercase character extends life of your password almost 12 years before new hardware can decrypt it as quickly as today's hardware. 23 1/2 if you use upper and lowercase.
Everytime I use Chrome (or indeed have an article comparing Firefox to Chrome anymore) I learn to abhor it that little bit more.
If chrome were a car it would 'upgraded' to a different model every six months, while they slowly pulled out your manual transmission for an automatic, accelerator for cruise control, steering wheel for google maps integration, brakes for collision detection, windshield for a blank screen, all while for some godawful reason telling you how good you have it why would you need any of those to drive.
I liked chrome as a concept originally, but for the love of god enough already. I'll stay with Firefox thank you very much.
Unfortunately your 'synopsis' of yes pretty much undermines the points for honesty that got you. Since what he actually said was that a period that short isn't statistically significant - Statistical significance is over far longer periods. My mother and 14 other smokers getting or not getting long cancer doesn't constitute a 'Study' in a statistically significant sense either--although it amazes me how many people to this day will say "Grandpa lived to 94, and smoked since he was 12" like that proves something--but actual studies are pretty definitive for both lung cancer and climate change.
Still, thanks for the link - it's a very useful example of people trying to confuse an issue by cherry picking their questions for specific answers, as opposed to taking *all* the information in context. I have mixed reactions to the BBC's implied endorsement of that kind of cherry picking - in the narrow sense it gives great quotes for people like yourself that cherry pick out of it, but it is useful as examples of irrational thought processes.
I also think it's highly useful to know when conventional wisdom is just flat out wrong. There's a lot of wasted energy going into things like Dare or Charter Schools that just don't actually score that well when you run the numbers. Nevermind people like Joe Arapaio.
My problem is the premise "Fox news saw that news tended to lean to the left,... "
Prior to Fox News news seesawed between: * Journalism * Protecting our Corporate Overlords * Banal false equivalencies.
None of these 'leaned' towards the left, unless you feel that genuine journalism has a leftward bias (I do not).
Fox News was established to sit an 1,000 pound ape on one side of the spectrum--to create a bias, not to correct for one--and they succeeded. Banal false equivalencies are no longer between right and left, but between extreme right and center while Journalism was sacrificed for Protecting our Corporate Overlords. Even PBS was pulled to the right by this--2/3rds of 'left-wing' PBS's guests in news shows are from the right side of the political spectrum--a spectrum itself pulled to the right given that the 'left-wing' guests would have been considered Centrists in 1982.
Successful? Sure - they picked up on the right wing mythology of victimhood and successfully worked the refs until the standards dropped to a point that calling out objectively untrue things like George Bush's budget numbers, WMD's in Iraq, or the Paul Ryan budget are all considered gauche and déclassé in the media. But let us not pretend it was because they were 'correcting' some bias.
Indeed, that's the problem with keyboards today is so many porn related searches require two hands.
Accordingly I am designing a porn layout for keyboards allowing the most efficient one-handed typing speeds. Currently I can search for porn at 152 words per minute, however all other typing is down to 9 words/minute. Further optimization may be less than useful.
And by 'every trend' make sure you include ridiculous patents, copyright trolls, and creating 'intellectual property' such as business method patents that were never intended to be patented in the first place.
All that said - actually given the copyright protection extended to furniture design and other such items in movies (which I don't think merit protection), a tattoo design definitely qualifies as art under copyright (And frankly, might qualify evenn if it hadn't been so overetended). Warner Brothers isn't commenting on or parodying the tattoo itself - they really don't have a leg to stand on regarding fair use.
I note for the record that, regardless of the size of the objects, since they are not in an 'orbit' they cannot have 'Cleared their orbital Path' and thus cannot be 'Planets'.
People with absolutely no formal authority to require him to give the admin passwords attempted to force him to do so.
He refused.
He was jailed. In jail he surrended to admin account info to the senior person in the company.
He has now been fined 1.5 million dollars for enforcing information security.
Next week, someone about to be fired from San Franscisco City Hall will inform his replacement that he wants the admin passwords to the network. Since Terry Childs was found guilty and held to a massive fine for not surrendering those passwords, his replacement will sensibly give this person admin access to the SF network.
When the replacement maliciously destroys the network in revenge for being fired - is the new administrator also responsible for the damage caused?
Actually no - Contract Law is almost exclusively the realm of the UCC law, adopted at the state level.
What the States Rights arm of the Supreme Court ruled is that state courts can't rule on what is defined as an unconscionable contract clause under state law. This in spite of the fact that UCC expressly allows for exactly this.
We know the GOP and conservatives are in favor of states rights of course. Because they tell us so all the time.
Yes - By all means, compare the treatment of a a U.S. Citizen who was placed on a list of people to be assassinated without trial or public review of evidence with a member of the Nazi's who, had he not killed himself, would have been placed on trial in full public view under the auspices of the Trial of the Major War Criminals.
Four of whom, because of civilized things like Standard of Evidence, Defense Attorneys, impartial judges, were acquitted.
Yes - certainly comparing assassinating a citizen based on secret evidence regardless of venue with a genuine war criminal that was to cowardly to stand trial at what would become the most highly documented trial in history is sure to make your point.
That would be a valid argument, if we had treated them as military prisoners up till then. However the Bush administration was quite clear, they didn't want to treat them as military prisoners. Or civilian prisoners. Actually, lets be fair - they didn't even want to give them trials or have the evidence heard at all - and indeed during the military trials when a number of these people were found "Not Guilty" rather than admitting that even these people should be released the military simply ignored the results.
So - A) Yes: if we're not going to hold them to the standards of the military conventions, given the 14th amendment we are required to treat them like citizens (or more to the point, legal residents) with all the rights that implies. B) If we are treating them as POW's there are specific military conventions we have violated C) We chose to do neither and when forced to do so came up with a process with even less protections than afforded to POWs and D) Having lowered our standards, we failed to meet those standards as well.
His commentary about treating them as beasts was entirely on the mark - or would be if people who treated animals like this were allowed on the street. The Bush administrations stain on our honor as a people will go down historically as being on par with our use of slaves, foreswearing treaties with Native Americans, and the internment of the Japanese during WW II. The complete failure of the Obama administration to take any action to refute the traitorous actions of the Bush administration only carries the dishonor forward.
Any civilized people would have everyone in the Bush administration that swore to uphold the Constitution and then took part in these crimes given the choice of honorable suicide before trial.
As an aside, I found the book What Intelligence Tests Miss (Subtitled: Logic, it works bitches!) to be a singularly good appraisal of both what IQ tests are good at measuring and the kinds of rational tools that people with measurably above average IQ's often don't have. It would be worth the cover price just for the chapter on Bayesian reasoning.
As a caveat, the author will mention about five times per chapter that these tools aren't measured by IQ tests, and that IQ tests really can't measure these, and that in many ways they are far more important than IQ, and . . . SHUT UP ALREADY, I BOUGHT THE BOOK I GET IT!!! The big downside to an otherwise excellent book.
That said, I would really like to see a book that explored these further, and did actual rationality training from the ground up - I fared better in a lot of the items than I would have assumed right off hand, but making the leap from the basic principles to an actual training system would be great.
I've read the ruling, kinda prepared to find out that the Ars Technica article had misunderstood or misrepresented something important about the situation, but it doesn't.
Actually, it pretty much says "Netflix made business decisions that made it unsuitable for the carefully negotiated deal Blockbuster and Netflix got, didn't want to prepay the way they did, used heavier mailers, and in general was unwilling to make the USPS job easier like the other companies. The situations are not even remotely comparable. So obviously the USPS should completely alter their system so Gamefly gets the same deal Netflix and Blockbuster worked their ass off to get."
It get there by, as near as I can read it, simply overruling every objection by the postal service and happily ceding every objection Gamefly makes. USPS introduced signed dated letters showing they made these offers to Gamefly, the commission ignored them. Gamefly introduced unsubstantiated evidence, the USPS objected, the commission asked if the USPS could prove they were forged?
The whole thing reads like that. I can only assume the Gamefly attorney is damn sexy or something.
Slashdot Mirror
More to the point it removes the entire point of white-box reverse engineering. Remember when Compaq reverse-engineered the IBM bios chip, creating the first IBM-compatibles? Q-Dos was recreated from the published manuals of CP/M.
If Oracle thinks they want to win this fight this way, they haven't thought how many principles of simple databases they have implemented that would fall under this concept.
Pug
That's why I've set Ctrl-Z to send an IM saying "Wait!" back in time 30 seconds. But of course that's easy on Linux.
Pug
It's not like people aren't trained to read legal papers . . .
Oh, wait, that kind of training takes 8 years and $100,000 dollars. People actually *aren't* trained to read and interpret legal papers, that might be why corporations hire lawyers to create contracts in which important legal information is hidden on other papers not made available at the time of the signing of the contract, completely ignoring the concept documented under the Uniform Commercial Code saying that a contract involves coming to a 'meeting of the minds'.
Sorry - I'd have to say this should be brought to a court. A contract does involve a meeting of the minds, and the company *knew* this addenda was entirely relevant to that meeting of the minds and took positive steps to hide that fact.
"In criminal law, a fraud is an intentional deception made for personal gain or to damage another individual; the related adjective is fraudulent. The specific legal definition varies by legal jurisdiction. Fraud is a crime, and also a civil law violation."
As a potential member of a jury pool, does putting such relevant information in a document not available at the time of the signing of the contract strike you as being either accidental or forthcoming?
Pug
Yes but the point is that (barring quantum machines) adding length (y) increases the permutations (and thus the size of the search space) at a far greater speed than adding characters (x). It also happens to be much for a human being to do rather than pulling out esoteric unicode characters that may or may not be legal characters in a given system.
Pug
Two other observations -
A) the Democrat that's not bought by corporate sector 'X' will actually go toe to toe with the Democrat whose state depends on that sector, and
B) even the Democrat that is under corporate influence becomes independent when things have *obviously* gotten out of hand - as an example witness the Dodd Frank act.
From the viewpoint of the corporate lobbyist Republicans have the 'virtue' that they stay bought and stick together no matter what.
Pug
The Lifecycle of Conservative Politics.
Step 1) Conservative voters fight tooth and nail to get people that espouse certain libertarian/objectivist/fundie christian philosophies elected to office/appointed to lifelong judicial positions.
Step 2) These people do . . .exactly what the philosophies they espoused implied they would do. The results are entirely predictable, devastating to the economy, destructive to the environment, creating about one millionaire for every few thousand people it drives into poverty.
Step 3a) Conservatives explain these people were never really conservative . . .
Step 3b) and anyway these sudden recent catastrophic results are actually because of liberal policies put into place decades ago that have never caused problems before.
Step 4) --> goto Step 1
Pug
Things to remember - password difficulty is based on x^y, where x is the number of possible characters and y is the password length. Increasing password length is *always* going to be more effective than increasing the mix of characters (indeed the point of a dictionary attack is to reduce can be thought of as reducing 96^8 8 character passwords to a mere 250,000^1).
Each additional alphanumeric character increases the search space by a factor of 62 - a two word password is still only 250,000^2, a password of ten random lowercase characters is 26^10, a *much* larger number.
Moores law says processing power doubles ~18 months. Every new lowercase character extends life of your password almost 12 years before new hardware can decrypt it as quickly as today's hardware. 23 1/2 if you use upper and lowercase.
Don't panic.
Everytime I use Chrome (or indeed have an article comparing Firefox to Chrome anymore) I learn to abhor it that little bit more.
If chrome were a car it would 'upgraded' to a different model every six months, while they slowly pulled out your manual transmission for an automatic, accelerator for cruise control, steering wheel for google maps integration, brakes for collision detection, windshield for a blank screen, all while for some godawful reason telling you how good you have it why would you need any of those to drive.
I liked chrome as a concept originally, but for the love of god enough already. I'll stay with Firefox thank you very much.
Pug
I'd love to hear that list - {G}
Pug
I thank you for providing the actual link.
Unfortunately your 'synopsis' of yes pretty much undermines the points for honesty that got you. Since what he actually said was that a period that short isn't statistically significant - Statistical significance is over far longer periods. My mother and 14 other smokers getting or not getting long cancer doesn't constitute a 'Study' in a statistically significant sense either--although it amazes me how many people to this day will say "Grandpa lived to 94, and smoked since he was 12" like that proves something--but actual studies are pretty definitive for both lung cancer and climate change.
Still, thanks for the link - it's a very useful example of people trying to confuse an issue by cherry picking their questions for specific answers, as opposed to taking *all* the information in context. I have mixed reactions to the BBC's implied endorsement of that kind of cherry picking - in the narrow sense it gives great quotes for people like yourself that cherry pick out of it, but it is useful as examples of irrational thought processes.
Pug
Point.
I also think it's highly useful to know when conventional wisdom is just flat out wrong. There's a lot of wasted energy going into things like Dare or Charter Schools that just don't actually score that well when you run the numbers. Nevermind people like Joe Arapaio.
Pug
My problem is the premise "Fox news saw that news tended to lean to the left, ... "
Prior to Fox News news seesawed between:
* Journalism
* Protecting our Corporate Overlords
* Banal false equivalencies.
None of these 'leaned' towards the left, unless you feel that genuine journalism has a leftward bias (I do not).
Fox News was established to sit an 1,000 pound ape on one side of the spectrum--to create a bias, not to correct for one--and they succeeded. Banal false equivalencies are no longer between right and left, but between extreme right and center while Journalism was sacrificed for Protecting our Corporate Overlords. Even PBS was pulled to the right by this--2/3rds of 'left-wing' PBS's guests in news shows are from the right side of the political spectrum--a spectrum itself pulled to the right given that the 'left-wing' guests would have been considered Centrists in 1982.
Successful? Sure - they picked up on the right wing mythology of victimhood and successfully worked the refs until the standards dropped to a point that calling out objectively untrue things like George Bush's budget numbers, WMD's in Iraq, or the Paul Ryan budget are all considered gauche and déclassé in the media. But let us not pretend it was because they were 'correcting' some bias.
Pug
What I actually like better is this Java C64 emulator - {G}
Uridium!
Pug
Indeed, that's the problem with keyboards today is so many porn related searches require two hands.
Accordingly I am designing a porn layout for keyboards allowing the most efficient one-handed typing speeds. Currently I can search for porn at 152 words per minute, however all other typing is down to 9 words/minute. Further optimization may be less than useful.
Pug
And by 'every trend' make sure you include ridiculous patents, copyright trolls, and creating 'intellectual property' such as business method patents that were never intended to be patented in the first place.
All that said - actually given the copyright protection extended to furniture design and other such items in movies (which I don't think merit protection), a tattoo design definitely qualifies as art under copyright (And frankly, might qualify evenn if it hadn't been so overetended). Warner Brothers isn't commenting on or parodying the tattoo itself - they really don't have a leg to stand on regarding fair use.
Pug
Pug
I note for the record that, regardless of the size of the objects, since they are not in an 'orbit' they cannot have 'Cleared their orbital Path' and thus cannot be 'Planets'.
They're "Over-sized Free-roaming gravitationally aggregated Pluto-like Objects"
SUCK ON THAT TYSON!!!!
{G} - Pug
Actually, I wanna be Batman in "Bruce Wayne: Billionaire Playboy" Form.
Let's put it this way.
People with absolutely no formal authority to require him to give the admin passwords attempted to force him to do so.
He refused.
He was jailed. In jail he surrended to admin account info to the senior person in the company.
He has now been fined 1.5 million dollars for enforcing information security.
Next week, someone about to be fired from San Franscisco City Hall will inform his replacement that he wants the admin passwords to the network. Since Terry Childs was found guilty and held to a massive fine for not surrendering those passwords, his replacement will sensibly give this person admin access to the SF network.
When the replacement maliciously destroys the network in revenge for being fired - is the new administrator also responsible for the damage caused?
Please show your work.
Pug
Actually no - Contract Law is almost exclusively the realm of the UCC law, adopted at the state level.
What the States Rights arm of the Supreme Court ruled is that state courts can't rule on what is defined as an unconscionable contract clause under state law. This in spite of the fact that UCC expressly allows for exactly this.
We know the GOP and conservatives are in favor of states rights of course. Because they tell us so all the time.
Pug
No, actually those just show you're lucid dreaming still . . . {rimshot}
Yes - By all means, compare the treatment of a a U.S. Citizen who was placed on a list of people to be assassinated without trial or public review of evidence with a member of the Nazi's who, had he not killed himself, would have been placed on trial in full public view under the auspices of the Trial of the Major War Criminals.
Four of whom, because of civilized things like Standard of Evidence, Defense Attorneys, impartial judges, were acquitted.
Yes - certainly comparing assassinating a citizen based on secret evidence regardless of venue with a genuine war criminal that was to cowardly to stand trial at what would become the most highly documented trial in history is sure to make your point.
Pug
That would be a valid argument, if we had treated them as military prisoners up till then. However the Bush administration was quite clear, they didn't want to treat them as military prisoners. Or civilian prisoners. Actually, lets be fair - they didn't even want to give them trials or have the evidence heard at all - and indeed during the military trials when a number of these people were found "Not Guilty" rather than admitting that even these people should be released the military simply ignored the results.
So -
A) Yes: if we're not going to hold them to the standards of the military conventions, given the 14th amendment we are required to treat them like citizens (or more to the point, legal residents) with all the rights that implies.
B) If we are treating them as POW's there are specific military conventions we have violated
C) We chose to do neither and when forced to do so came up with a process with even less protections than afforded to POWs and
D) Having lowered our standards, we failed to meet those standards as well.
His commentary about treating them as beasts was entirely on the mark - or would be if people who treated animals like this were allowed on the street. The Bush administrations stain on our honor as a people will go down historically as being on par with our use of slaves, foreswearing treaties with Native Americans, and the internment of the Japanese during WW II. The complete failure of the Obama administration to take any action to refute the traitorous actions of the Bush administration only carries the dishonor forward.
Any civilized people would have everyone in the Bush administration that swore to uphold the Constitution and then took part in these crimes given the choice of honorable suicide before trial.
Pug
I feel for you - I bought a Mensa Anniversary mug years ago - very pretty, Gold leaf on it, nice keepsake.
Did I mention the Gold leaf? That turns out to be important, because you shouldn't put a pretty, gold leaf Mensa cup in a Microwave.
Certainly not <coff><coff>, um . . twice.
<G> - Pug
As an aside, I found the book What Intelligence Tests Miss (Subtitled: Logic, it works bitches!) to be a singularly good appraisal of both what IQ tests are good at measuring and the kinds of rational tools that people with measurably above average IQ's often don't have. It would be worth the cover price just for the chapter on Bayesian reasoning.
As a caveat, the author will mention about five times per chapter that these tools aren't measured by IQ tests, and that IQ tests really can't measure these, and that in many ways they are far more important than IQ, and . . . SHUT UP ALREADY, I BOUGHT THE BOOK I GET IT!!! The big downside to an otherwise excellent book.
That said, I would really like to see a book that explored these further, and did actual rationality training from the ground up - I fared better in a lot of the items than I would have assumed right off hand, but making the leap from the basic principles to an actual training system would be great.
Pug
I've read the ruling, kinda prepared to find out that the Ars Technica article had misunderstood or misrepresented something important about the situation, but it doesn't.
Actually, it pretty much says "Netflix made business decisions that made it unsuitable for the carefully negotiated deal Blockbuster and Netflix got, didn't want to prepay the way they did, used heavier mailers, and in general was unwilling to make the USPS job easier like the other companies. The situations are not even remotely comparable. So obviously the USPS should completely alter their system so Gamefly gets the same deal Netflix and Blockbuster worked their ass off to get."
It get there by, as near as I can read it, simply overruling every objection by the postal service and happily ceding every objection Gamefly makes. USPS introduced signed dated letters showing they made these offers to Gamefly, the commission ignored them. Gamefly introduced unsubstantiated evidence, the USPS objected, the commission asked if the USPS could prove they were forged?
The whole thing reads like that. I can only assume the Gamefly attorney is damn sexy or something.
Pug