It's not about PERSONAL harm. It's about professional ethics and legal implications. If you were fired from a company, and subsequently went and posted every password you knew on a forum or email list, you'd be sued or charged in a heartbeat.
This is no different in the least -- even if he was already barred from accessing the system, it was still a random group of people whose authority over him and/or the systems was nonexistent, or questionable at best. If he HAD divulged the passwords in those circumstances, he should have been charged, not the other way around.
No one in the room was in Childs' chain of command. His boss wasn't there, nor was his boss' boss, etc. It was a group of random city employees (city police, HR) and random, unknown people on the other end of a phone.
What authority did anyone there have to order him to divulge passwords?
If someone from HR or Finance, even if they're a VP or C*O, came to me and said "Hand over all the network passwords now.", I'd tell them to fuck off too until someone to whom I report said otherwise.
Spoken like someone who grew up with NAT being the norm. NAT is terribly broken, and UPNP is even worse. There shouldn't be a need to resort to hack-upon-hack to get networking to work. I long for the day when I only have to worry about routing & firewalling on my network again.
That's not even getting into all the millions of unused IP's being held by the early internet companies.
IP's just need to be charged for on a early basis. Start with $1 per year per ip to EVERYONE who owns an IP's and you'll see the "IP Shortage" vanish overnight.
Great, $1 per IP. 2^32-1 possible IPs... that's only a touch over $4B per year. Who want to bet that Microsoft would eat up all it could, just to have control? Hell, at that price I'd buy a couple hundred just for me. Start talking several thousand dollars per IP per year and you might be on the right track... oh wait, no you're not, because it's an artificial scarcity. (Besides, who would the money for the IP addresses go to? IANA? What would they use it for?)
[italic]Isn't this entrapment? [/italic] No, entrapment only happens when the authorities coerce you into doing something you wouldn't have done normally (i.e. send a hot female officer who promises to, ahem, 'reward' you if you commit an illegal act against your will). It does not cover things done of your own will (i.e. signing up for a forum and participating).
Anyway - one person's view can be "Religion", another "Cult" and a third it can be "Lifestyle". Cult: A small, unpopular religion. Religion: A large, popular cult.
1) Comcast's customers shall fulfill their obligations (i.e. pay their bill). 2) Comcast shall fulfill their obligations (i.e. deliver any network traffic without prejudice).
To talk about your example: fopen( ) might be nice and simple, but the capabilities provided by.net and Java are much bigger in scope.
Yup, I agree -- sometimes encapsulating and abstracting the problem is the right approach. Key word there? Sometimes.
If you have a simple, well defined problem (e.g. 'write these 8 bytes to a file'), a 'nice and simple' solution often does the trick. Less code means less complexity and more clarity. With C++, for example, you could use a simple fopen() -- or you could write an encapsulation class/function. Java (and.NET, I hear, never used it myself) give you no choice but to use the encapsulated methods.
Engineers solve hard problems. Great engineers solve hard problems through simplicity. Always remember Occam's Razor!
Addendum: What I forgot to mention is under the original poster's idea, what would stop the $megaCorps from re-valuing the patent after the 'auction' by declaring that it's lost market value?
If there was a way to fairly regulate it then yes, that particular loophole would be closed. But with all the loopholes in tax laws, etc, it might be too easy to write it off as a loss or something.
don't see how you could possibly think that it would go anywhere but to the previous owner. Is there any instance where the sale of something at an auction (a non charity one, at least) leads to somebody other than the previous owner getting the money?
I was waiting for someone to bring that up.:) There's a major flaw with it in this case.
"Hello, I'm the current copyright holder. I bid ONE HUNDRED BILLION TRILLION ZOMG BBQ DOLLARS. OK, I win, now I just pay myself and keep my invention. Since I paid out and received the same amount of money, my net gain/loss is zero."
Under that system, where would the money from the auction go? To the government? To the original inventor? To the previous owner of the IP?
There are flaws with that system no matter how you look at it:
Some dude in a garage invents something amazing, makes a few million bucks selling it. In 10 years time, maybe it's become even more relevant (ready for mass adoption), so $megaCorp steps in and 'bids' a few BILLION on it. Original inventor doesn't have that kind of capital, loses rights to $megaCorp. But the rights are now transferred to someone else for their exclusive use. The small guy gets locked out, and the public interest still isn't satisfied.
Under your other scenario ("for IP that drastically changes in value in a short time, a petition... triggered early") is even WORSE, because $megaCorp could argue that the IP's value has changed drastically in the first 6 months and squash the original inventor before he's had a chance to reap his reward.
There's been a few times where I hit the limit and had to split transfers over 2 days but it wasn't much of an inconvenience. It still got the money there faster than mailing a cheque!
I'm sure I could have called my bank and had them up the limit, but I'd rather have that additional layer of security, just in case.
Totally agree in principle, but there are actually additional safeguards with the Interac tranfers.
My bank places a limit of $1000/day on email transfers (I think there's an additional weekly limit as well), so the attacker would have to have continued access for a series of days/weeks to empty out an account.
However, if the attacker has tapped into your communications, he knows when you're going on vacation and won't be around to check your accounts.:p
Slashdot Mirror
There is, but little-to-none of it takes the form of kickbacks to US Senators, which is why he's all up in arms.
Why beam power all the way from orbit? Wouldn't an army of sharks with frickin' laser beams on their heads be more effective? :p
How does that make it cool? It sounds more like desperation.
It's also what got us into the whole Java School mess.
You keep your noscript plugin, and I'll keep intuitive webUI.
'Intuitive' web UI doesn't need JavaScript -- it can be done purely with CSS.
Example
It's not about PERSONAL harm. It's about professional ethics and legal implications. If you were fired from a company, and subsequently went and posted every password you knew on a forum or email list, you'd be sued or charged in a heartbeat.
This is no different in the least -- even if he was already barred from accessing the system, it was still a random group of people whose authority over him and/or the systems was nonexistent, or questionable at best. If he HAD divulged the passwords in those circumstances, he should have been charged, not the other way around.
No one in the room was in Childs' chain of command. His boss wasn't there, nor was his boss' boss, etc. It was a group of random city employees (city police, HR) and random, unknown people on the other end of a phone.
What authority did anyone there have to order him to divulge passwords?
If someone from HR or Finance, even if they're a VP or C*O, came to me and said "Hand over all the network passwords now.", I'd tell them to fuck off too until someone to whom I report said otherwise.
The Rogers overage charges stop at $25. So whether you use 150GB or 1TB per month, your bill will only be $54.95 + $25.00 + taxes.
My bandwidth is regularly several hundred gigs a month on Rogers Extreme. I've done 1TB+ in a month before.
Nat+uPNP is perfectly capable
Spoken like someone who grew up with NAT being the norm. NAT is terribly broken, and UPNP is even worse. There shouldn't be a need to resort to hack-upon-hack to get networking to work. I long for the day when I only have to worry about routing & firewalling on my network again.
That's not even getting into all the millions of unused IP's being held by the early internet companies.
IP's just need to be charged for on a early basis. Start with $1 per year per ip to EVERYONE who owns an IP's and you'll see the "IP Shortage" vanish overnight.
Great, $1 per IP. 2^32-1 possible IPs... that's only a touch over $4B per year. Who want to bet that Microsoft would eat up all it could, just to have control? Hell, at that price I'd buy a couple hundred just for me. Start talking several thousand dollars per IP per year and you might be on the right track... oh wait, no you're not, because it's an artificial scarcity. (Besides, who would the money for the IP addresses go to? IANA? What would they use it for?)
Ahaha, wow, I can't believe I did that. Yeah, that's supposed to be 1997. :p /headdesk
Pretty sure they're talking about the Slashdot "community" -- Slashdot was founded in Sept 2007.
[italic]Isn't this entrapment? [/italic]
No, entrapment only happens when the authorities coerce you into doing something you wouldn't have done normally (i.e. send a hot female officer who promises to, ahem, 'reward' you if you commit an illegal act against your will). It does not cover things done of your own will (i.e. signing up for a forum and participating).
I foresee many posts on thedailywtf about projects which implement this 'technology'...
Is that your web site on this business card, or a PGP signature? :)
WinXP, Nervous Pack 3 is approved for release as Win7.
Is that a fork of Service Pack 3 which is already available?
clicky
Anyway - one person's view can be "Religion", another "Cult" and a third it can be "Lifestyle".
Cult: A small, unpopular religion.
Religion: A large, popular cult.
How about this?
1) Comcast's customers shall fulfill their obligations (i.e. pay their bill).
2) Comcast shall fulfill their obligations (i.e. deliver any network traffic without prejudice).
Well, their last name is, after all, 'Boring'. Maybe they're just looking for a little excitement? *ducks*
To talk about your example: fopen( ) might be nice and simple, but the capabilities provided by .net and Java are much bigger in scope.
.NET, I hear, never used it myself) give you no choice but to use the encapsulated methods.
Yup, I agree -- sometimes encapsulating and abstracting the problem is the right approach. Key word there? Sometimes.
If you have a simple, well defined problem (e.g. 'write these 8 bytes to a file'), a 'nice and simple' solution often does the trick. Less code means less complexity and more clarity. With C++, for example, you could use a simple fopen() -- or you could write an encapsulation class/function. Java (and
Engineers solve hard problems. Great engineers solve hard problems through simplicity. Always remember Occam's Razor!
Addendum: What I forgot to mention is under the original poster's idea, what would stop the $megaCorps from re-valuing the patent after the 'auction' by declaring that it's lost market value?
If there was a way to fairly regulate it then yes, that particular loophole would be closed. But with all the loopholes in tax laws, etc, it might be too easy to write it off as a loss or something.
don't see how you could possibly think that it would go anywhere but to the previous owner. Is there any instance where the sale of something at an auction (a non charity one, at least) leads to somebody other than the previous owner getting the money?
:) There's a major flaw with it in this case.
I was waiting for someone to bring that up.
"Hello, I'm the current copyright holder. I bid ONE HUNDRED BILLION TRILLION ZOMG BBQ DOLLARS. OK, I win, now I just pay myself and keep my invention. Since I paid out and received the same amount of money, my net gain/loss is zero."
Under that system, where would the money from the auction go? To the government? To the original inventor? To the previous owner of the IP?
... triggered early") is even WORSE, because $megaCorp could argue that the IP's value has changed drastically in the first 6 months and squash the original inventor before he's had a chance to reap his reward.
There are flaws with that system no matter how you look at it:
Some dude in a garage invents something amazing, makes a few million bucks selling it. In 10 years time, maybe it's become even more relevant (ready for mass adoption), so $megaCorp steps in and 'bids' a few BILLION on it. Original inventor doesn't have that kind of capital, loses rights to $megaCorp. But the rights are now transferred to someone else for their exclusive use. The small guy gets locked out, and the public interest still isn't satisfied.
Under your other scenario ("for IP that drastically changes in value in a short time, a petition
That's a very circular argument.
If 500 1-acre lots are worth more than a single 500-acre plot, the $developmentCompany will buy out the 500-acre lot for the 'value' of 600 acres.
Now 600 1-acre lots are worth more than a single 600-acre plot, the $developmentCompany will buy out the 600-acro lot for the 'value' of 700 acres.
Ad nauseam....
Yeah, too bad the change control process is such a bitch.
There's been a few times where I hit the limit and had to split transfers over 2 days but it wasn't much of an inconvenience. It still got the money there faster than mailing a cheque!
I'm sure I could have called my bank and had them up the limit, but I'd rather have that additional layer of security, just in case.
Totally agree in principle, but there are actually additional safeguards with the Interac tranfers.
:p
My bank places a limit of $1000/day on email transfers (I think there's an additional weekly limit as well), so the attacker would have to have continued access for a series of days/weeks to empty out an account.
However, if the attacker has tapped into your communications, he knows when you're going on vacation and won't be around to check your accounts.