ONE SHOULD NEVER SEE A FILE ENTITLED "partyinvite.doc",
That is true. However, an.exe can have it's own icon embedded in the file, so one could name it partyinvite.exe and give it the icon from a Word doc, and Joe Schmoe would have no clue. In fact, a lot of people would miss that.
That's true, but in this case only *one* party (the RIAA's lawyers) was represented in the Judge's chambers
That's what "ex parte" (or in this case, "in camera") means, yes. It is routine. Happens all the time. Really. It can be misused, abused, yes, and that is grounds for appeal. But the mere use of ex parte is not, and it happens all the time. Really.
Actually, ex parte (or 'in camera') stuff happens all the time, and is routine. Not necessarily common, but not at all unusual, and not necessarily a no no of any kind.
Cat 5 - not even Cat 5e - is rated at 100 mbps, five times the speed of your line. Cat 3 is rated at 10 mbps. Cat 6 is, what, gbps?
So you strip a little too much insulation off, and are a bit sloppy on the crimps, and even turn a corner a little too tight on your Cat 6, and you reduce its capacity a little. Or a lot. You could reduce it by 98% and still have as much bandwidth as your data line.
I think that what one should keep in mind is that most people have no idea how little bandwidth they actually use. A one gigabyte file across a 100 mpbs connection is not much over a minute to complete. Not instant, certainly, but fast enough that few people would complain. How many people actually work with files over 1 GB on a regular basis? How many even can, for practical purposes. If it takes longer for Windows to open the file because of virtual memory issues than it did for you to pull it across the network, your network is fast enough.
But, as you say, if you need bandwidth, you need it, and there is no decaffeinated brand that tastes just as good.
I am responsible for a 17 location VPN base WAN for a retail chain. We use Cat5e for everything, but in the end, it hardly matters, because Cat3 at 10 mbps is still over four times faster than the T-1 that it talks to the outside world with.
But we don't work with large files internally, even here in the corporate office. If one is working with gigabyte sized files on a regular basis, on a local network, it would matter.
If the claims for responsibility are even close to accurate, and they seem plausible, it wasn't a "hack" so much as gaming the system for consumers to complain of "adult content." Nothing was used in a way that it was not intended to be used, from a technical standpoint.
As for "implementing as wildly-unpopular new policy without telling anyone," there are reports of this going back to February, and very credible reports that thousands of romance novels were affected, probably more than the "gay" conent novels. Seems an odd thing for Amazon to do, don't you think?
But we'll never know, and articles like this are the reason why. If it was someone gaming the consumer tagging system, there is no way to explain it to the average person that will not make it sound like their web site was "hacked," which is to say, compromised. Given the rash of recent actual cracks involving hundreds of millions of credit card numbers, Amazon has damned good reason to not shoot from the hip in any public statements.
An apology for being so inept that a claim that a single person caused this with "ten lines of code" would be nice, though.
No, but it puts *all* places within easy reach to conduct research in selecting more vulnerable targets.
So criminals are going to go rob a place that's too invonvenient to case in person? Using photographs that show maybe 10% of what they can see in person?
Take you lithium, son. Seriously. You're paranoid. Criminals aren't that smart.
While everything you say is true, there's nothing that a criminal can do with a photograph taken from a public place that they cannot do while standing in that public place themselves. And do better, in fact.
This is a complete non-issue. People don't like it because they have a fetish for privacy that hasn't existed for decades, if it ever did at all.
Have they condsidered that perhaps families with autistic children are more likely to put in vinyl flooring? It is, after all, easier to keep clean than, say, carpet, and cheaper to replace than hardwood if damaged.
that within 5 minutes of the sale of the first such laptop, there will be 1,080,456 web sites with detailed, step by step instructions (with screen shots) on how to disable the feature, and at least ten times as many with instructions on how to physically remove the wireless moden.
And ten seconds after that, every single one of them will be slashdotted.
Always found it amusing in the first place given they've gone completely fucking bonkers with speed cameras, CCTV, "anti social behavior" laws, and of course the UK has much of the same anti-terror bullshit. Meanwhile, Cambridge (mass) just rejected cameras that were going to be installed by Homeland Insecurity over privacy issues. The backlash is gaining; in the UK, it never star
Actually, burning (and otherwise destroyign) speed cameras in the UK has become such a national pastime, they're starting to organize a professional league for formal competition. In all seriousness, some groups have developted techniques that can completely destroy a camera in a matter of seconds.
The first job responsibility in our employee handbook is that we have to get along with other employees. In other words, yes, it is my job (and everyone else's job) to not piss people off. Unless Josh can literally do every job in the company, he's not worth losing other employees over. No matter how productive he is, he's not the entire company.
Plus, creating a hostile work environment is illegal.
Any company that tolerates assholes like this will have no other competent employees.
What counterbalances these "power durnk students" choosing to go to an easy school is that businesses will be far, far less likely to hire grads from those easy schools. This particular hysterical drivel clashes with the hysterical drivel about "helicopter moms" who try to control every aspect of Junior's life by remote control, cuz Mom and Dad are going to go for the school that has a higher rate of students having jobs secured at graduation, with higher rates of pay.
In other words, this is nothing new, just another iteration of the centuries long cycle of easy schools reducing the value of a degree which leads them to become tougher.
In point of fact, it is very clear that this bridge will, in fact, be a public road, open to anyone who wishes to use it. And even if no one ever uses who is not a Microsoft employee, it will draw traffic away from other, apparently crowded, roads to use this on instead. That is a direct public benefit to everyone in the area, in the form of reduced congestion on roads around a major employer in the area.
So, your first qustion is irrelevant, since it is based on factually incorrect assumptions. And it is comprable to the Disneyland exist on the I-5, because it address precisely the same public interests - reduced traffic congestion in the surrounding area.
Were this any lesser company, 100% of the cost would be paid for by tax dollars. That Microsoft is contributing half is either a sginficant act of generosity on their part, or a major triumph of democracy over corporate greed and corruption. Either way, it's a victory for taxpayers.
It was a similar situation when Disneyland wanted their own exit on the I-5 in Anaheim. There were significant reasons from the taxpayers point of view to do this - it greatly improved traffic in that section of the freeway, and throughout that part of Anaheim - but Disney still ended up paying for a significant portion of the cost. (In their case, it was a damned good investment in their wholly owned subsidiary, the city of Anaheim.)
I remember Gopher. Used it a bit, when I first got online. The WWW was to Gopher as Web 2.0 is to WWW. Really. The web was a natural progression of improvement from Gopher. It was wasn't called Gopher 2.0, much like Windows 95 wasn't called Windows 4.0. It was a new version, and somebody though it woudl be good to give it a new name.
Your friend gets 1/17th of the profits? Or 1/17th of the retail price? 6% of the sale price is about right for most areas of publishing, from what I'm told. 6% of the profits, however, is another matter entirely. I'll buy you lunch if it's actually 1/17th of the profits.
Things vary by state somewhat, but generally speaking, traffic tickets are usually infractions, not misdemeanors. Infractions are "civil offenses," not "criminal offenses." In other words, the police can't arrest you - they have to find a criminal reason, though, of course, all states have various forms of "driving like a moron" laws that are misdemeanors, for when you piss the cops off - for a traffic ticket. And the judge can't sentence you to jail for an infraction. (He can, of course, sentence you to jail for contempt if you don't pay the fine, or don't show up for the hearing.)
As to the constitutional right to a jury trial, go for it (whoever it was that was parroting that old crap). The more insistent you get, the longer the judge will throw your ass in jail for contempt. It's been to the Supreme Court, and you do not, in fact, have a right to a jury trial on an infraction.
Slashdot Mirror
ONE SHOULD NEVER SEE A FILE ENTITLED "partyinvite.doc",
That is true. However, an .exe can have it's own icon embedded in the file, so one could name it partyinvite.exe and give it the icon from a Word doc, and Joe Schmoe would have no clue. In fact, a lot of people would miss that.
That's true, but in this case only *one* party (the RIAA's lawyers) was represented in the Judge's chambers
That's what "ex parte" (or in this case, "in camera") means, yes. It is routine. Happens all the time. Really. It can be misused, abused, yes, and that is grounds for appeal. But the mere use of ex parte is not, and it happens all the time. Really.
Actually, ex parte (or 'in camera') stuff happens all the time, and is routine. Not necessarily common, but not at all unusual, and not necessarily a no no of any kind.
Cat 5 - not even Cat 5e - is rated at 100 mbps, five times the speed of your line. Cat 3 is rated at 10 mbps. Cat 6 is, what, gbps?
So you strip a little too much insulation off, and are a bit sloppy on the crimps, and even turn a corner a little too tight on your Cat 6, and you reduce its capacity a little. Or a lot. You could reduce it by 98% and still have as much bandwidth as your data line.
I think that what one should keep in mind is that most people have no idea how little bandwidth they actually use. A one gigabyte file across a 100 mpbs connection is not much over a minute to complete. Not instant, certainly, but fast enough that few people would complain. How many people actually work with files over 1 GB on a regular basis? How many even can, for practical purposes. If it takes longer for Windows to open the file because of virtual memory issues than it did for you to pull it across the network, your network is fast enough.
But, as you say, if you need bandwidth, you need it, and there is no decaffeinated brand that tastes just as good.
I am responsible for a 17 location VPN base WAN for a retail chain. We use Cat5e for everything, but in the end, it hardly matters, because Cat3 at 10 mbps is still over four times faster than the T-1 that it talks to the outside world with.
But we don't work with large files internally, even here in the corporate office. If one is working with gigabyte sized files on a regular basis, on a local network, it would matter.
If the claims for responsibility are even close to accurate, and they seem plausible, it wasn't a "hack" so much as gaming the system for consumers to complain of "adult content." Nothing was used in a way that it was not intended to be used, from a technical standpoint.
As for "implementing as wildly-unpopular new policy without telling anyone," there are reports of this going back to February, and very credible reports that thousands of romance novels were affected, probably more than the "gay" conent novels. Seems an odd thing for Amazon to do, don't you think?
But we'll never know, and articles like this are the reason why. If it was someone gaming the consumer tagging system, there is no way to explain it to the average person that will not make it sound like their web site was "hacked," which is to say, compromised. Given the rash of recent actual cracks involving hundreds of millions of credit card numbers, Amazon has damned good reason to not shoot from the hip in any public statements.
An apology for being so inept that a claim that a single person caused this with "ten lines of code" would be nice, though.
So if it is true, Amazon isn't to blame here.
Other than for creating a system that allows this with ten lines of code.
No, but it puts *all* places within easy reach to conduct research in selecting more vulnerable targets.
So criminals are going to go rob a place that's too invonvenient to case in person? Using photographs that show maybe 10% of what they can see in person?
Take you lithium, son. Seriously. You're paranoid. Criminals aren't that smart.
While everything you say is true, there's nothing that a criminal can do with a photograph taken from a public place that they cannot do while standing in that public place themselves. And do better, in fact.
This is a complete non-issue. People don't like it because they have a fetish for privacy that hasn't existed for decades, if it ever did at all.
Have they condsidered that perhaps families with autistic children are more likely to put in vinyl flooring? It is, after all, easier to keep clean than, say, carpet, and cheaper to replace than hardwood if damaged.
that within 5 minutes of the sale of the first such laptop, there will be 1,080,456 web sites with detailed, step by step instructions (with screen shots) on how to disable the feature, and at least ten times as many with instructions on how to physically remove the wireless moden.
And ten seconds after that, every single one of them will be slashdotted.
Always found it amusing in the first place given they've gone completely fucking bonkers with speed cameras, CCTV, "anti social behavior" laws, and of course the UK has much of the same anti-terror bullshit. Meanwhile, Cambridge (mass) just rejected cameras that were going to be installed by Homeland Insecurity over privacy issues. The backlash is gaining; in the UK, it never star
Actually, burning (and otherwise destroyign) speed cameras in the UK has become such a national pastime, they're starting to organize a professional league for formal competition. In all seriousness, some groups have developted techniques that can completely destroy a camera in a matter of seconds.
The first job responsibility in our employee handbook is that we have to get along with other employees. In other words, yes, it is my job (and everyone else's job) to not piss people off. Unless Josh can literally do every job in the company, he's not worth losing other employees over. No matter how productive he is, he's not the entire company.
Plus, creating a hostile work environment is illegal.
Any company that tolerates assholes like this will have no other competent employees.
What makes you think there is a difference?
What counterbalances these "power durnk students" choosing to go to an easy school is that businesses will be far, far less likely to hire grads from those easy schools. This particular hysterical drivel clashes with the hysterical drivel about "helicopter moms" who try to control every aspect of Junior's life by remote control, cuz Mom and Dad are going to go for the school that has a higher rate of students having jobs secured at graduation, with higher rates of pay.
In other words, this is nothing new, just another iteration of the centuries long cycle of easy schools reducing the value of a degree which leads them to become tougher.
In point of fact, it is very clear that this bridge will, in fact, be a public road, open to anyone who wishes to use it. And even if no one ever uses who is not a Microsoft employee, it will draw traffic away from other, apparently crowded, roads to use this on instead. That is a direct public benefit to everyone in the area, in the form of reduced congestion on roads around a major employer in the area.
So, your first qustion is irrelevant, since it is based on factually incorrect assumptions. And it is comprable to the Disneyland exist on the I-5, because it address precisely the same public interests - reduced traffic congestion in the surrounding area.
Were this any lesser company, 100% of the cost would be paid for by tax dollars. That Microsoft is contributing half is either a sginficant act of generosity on their part, or a major triumph of democracy over corporate greed and corruption. Either way, it's a victory for taxpayers.
It was a similar situation when Disneyland wanted their own exit on the I-5 in Anaheim. There were significant reasons from the taxpayers point of view to do this - it greatly improved traffic in that section of the freeway, and throughout that part of Anaheim - but Disney still ended up paying for a significant portion of the cost. (In their case, it was a damned good investment in their wholly owned subsidiary, the city of Anaheim.)
I remember Gopher. Used it a bit, when I first got online. The WWW was to Gopher as Web 2.0 is to WWW. Really. The web was a natural progression of improvement from Gopher. It was wasn't called Gopher 2.0, much like Windows 95 wasn't called Windows 4.0. It was a new version, and somebody though it woudl be good to give it a new name.
You clearly don't know much about the California Monkey Sanctuary. This guy's not even unusual.
Taylor's son, Damilola Taylor, was killed in November 2000 at the age of 10 by knife stabbing."
So this guy's channeling Pat Pulling?
I agree. Anybody who is going to switch their OS over boot times hasn't used Windows in a long time.
Your friend gets 1/17th of the profits? Or 1/17th of the retail price? 6% of the sale price is about right for most areas of publishing, from what I'm told. 6% of the profits, however, is another matter entirely. I'll buy you lunch if it's actually 1/17th of the profits.
Things vary by state somewhat, but generally speaking, traffic tickets are usually infractions, not misdemeanors. Infractions are "civil offenses," not "criminal offenses." In other words, the police can't arrest you - they have to find a criminal reason, though, of course, all states have various forms of "driving like a moron" laws that are misdemeanors, for when you piss the cops off - for a traffic ticket. And the judge can't sentence you to jail for an infraction. (He can, of course, sentence you to jail for contempt if you don't pay the fine, or don't show up for the hearing.)
As to the constitutional right to a jury trial, go for it (whoever it was that was parroting that old crap). The more insistent you get, the longer the judge will throw your ass in jail for contempt. It's been to the Supreme Court, and you do not, in fact, have a right to a jury trial on an infraction.
There isn't a jurisdiction in the United States that will give you a jury trial for a parking ticket.