"The downside is that you could also use that kind of search to look for things that are vulnerable and then guess who might have used that code snippet and then just fire away at it," says Mike Armistead, vice president of products with source-code analysis provider Fortify Software.
So Robert McMillan of IDG digs up a small competitor to Google Code, who says actually publishing open source is bad. Of course, the point of open source is that anyone, not just motivated attackers, can inspect the source to reveal problems, and even fix them ourselves.
Fortify doesn't seem to offer GPL or any other open source for its own product. But it does seem to publish its own version of Google Code's results. Which any worthwhile reporter would have learned, if they wanted to tell us a story about the risks of open source, rather than a competitor's story of how "Google is Evil".
Why should Google be any different from any other sales "person"? When they actually sell your stuff, they're heroes. When they just give it away for free, or annoy you without selling anything, they're villains.
Google shouldn't be able to transmit copies of content without the copyright holder allowing that, but when they do so and make money for those holders (without reducing money those holders make elsewhere), they won't get many complaints.
Of course, while copyrights stop copying well past the length required to protect the motivation for producing them, and stop the fair uses (including indexing for referrals), it's hard to be sympathetic about violations of what are really "copyprivileges", rather than real "rights".
I point out the simple logical fallacy in the article that hides Republican "kill the messenger" tricks, which fallacy slimes a popular 2-term US president, and my post is "Flamebait"?
Republican TrollMods have gotten so addicted to power that they can't stand seeing it crack in front of their faces.
Can someone show me where "Mark Foley, George Allen, and Bill Clinton" or their supporters attacked their accusers solely on their motivations? OK, Foley and Allen, but not Clinton.
How about where "Mark Foley, George Allen, and Bill Clinton" were attacked by their accusers solely on their motivations? OK, Clinton but not Foley and Allen.
And how about showing me some distinction between Web vs TV criticism, more or less attacking solely motivations? Right - about the same for both. Though Web criticism, even faster paced than TV (without a rigid broadcast schedule and filler commercials), does happen sooner. Especially because more of the process from the originators can be seen on the Web, rather than just the eventual "final product" on TV.
Looked at without the Republican corporate mass media agenda to confuse the issues, the actual trend is clear. Republicans attack messengers because the negative messages are usually true. And the Web is faster and more "raw" than TV, so those attacks start there.
The election of people unfit to lead is left as an exercise to the reader.
Condensation catchments were developed over many generations in arid climates. I bet none of these industrial capacity systems have any projection what sucking the scarce moisture from the air for troops will do to the rest of the extremely fragile desert ecosystem that also depends on it. Maybe that's why so many of the places humans have lived longest are now deserts.
"these pictures become laughable after 20 years. Not for Royal Philips Electronics"
Right, because of course in the future RPE will have been the first company to predict the actual future, not just today's future. They're just different from all the others, just because.
Unless they opened this exhibit in 1986, and predicted a future of cellphones ruining movies, Internet porn replacing TV, theocrats destroying science, and no flying cars. Oh, and a 1986-future-2006 with people still believing "* of the Future" exhibits are real predictions, instead of marketing whatever can't be justified to do in the present.
The missing field in that CNN list of VCs, what they'll buy and what they'll pay, is "What they'll let you keep:". When a VC gives you money to startup a company, they get most of the equity in the company. So they can sell it when (if) its value goes up on the value of the product you develop. They'll make you spend that money you get from them on developing their company. Expenses and operations designed to increase the apparent value of their company, even when that doesn't reflect the actual value of the product. And with the majority ownership, they'll make "your" company do whatever they want, including fire you. While they keep everything you contributed to the corporation. If you're lucky, the new guys will make the company worth enough that you'll get something when they sell it. But of course they'll probably dilute your ownership by issuing "new shares" to new investors, from which they'll keep the money.
And the majority of the corporations they "invest in" fail - justified only by the few that pay for the whole lot.
It's not always like that, not on every point. But that's the way to bet: the VCs certainly do.
By all means listen to what they want. But if you can do it without VC money, do it. Or just make sure to sell them only minority stakes, and don't get diluted out of power over your own vision.
"drive and check e-mail at the same time. That's vastly safer than drivers looking down and taking one or both hands off the wheel to play with their BlackBerry" - Jonathan Fram
This fool wants to pay people to put email in the hands of people driving down the road. These are people who can't drive their giant SUVs already, read signs, use their signals. He thinks putting their Blackberries in a virtual page on the rear end of the car in front will be safe, not just make them tailgate even more.
Combining the yuppie inability to spell in email with the yuppie inability to drive in traffic. This guy should win the Darwin Awards as sponsor of fish bicycles.
Of course there are bad "apples" in every industry, in every country. That's why we have laws against bad "apples", government oversight of industry, reporting requirements, consumer watchdogs... a whole infrastructure the people use to protect ourselves from irresponsible and criminal corporations.
US corporations often avoid handling data inside the US because even our crude and inadequate privacy laws still add costs and risks to those operations, but overseas there's little to no risk to the US operation that dispatches the profits (or at least extracts them from our pockets).
Real privacy laws in the US would protect Americans from corporations sending data overseas avoiding US controls. And good ones would make the entire chain required to protect the strongest link in the dataflow, rather than letting everything spill out the weakest.
We'd protect our privacy, and protect our jobs that treat private data right. If we forced foreign competitors to pay the full cost of the privacy protections we require, we'd have a truly global workforce we could use, rather than letting the world work against us at our expense.
TrollMods don't want you to know that you can feel safer by voting in a month, on TUE November 7, 2006, to fire your representative and probably your senator, too.
Because TrollMods are Republicans, and your representative and senators are probably Republicans, too.
Five years of George "The Genius" Bush protecting us. Revamped all our security into "Homeland Security", reorganized all our intelligence systems, got a Republican Congress to do whatever he wanted. Now we're starting to see how rampant insecurity has rotted his huge government from the inside.
Feel safer?
Vote to fire or keep your Representative on TUE November 7, 2006 (one month from tomorrow). Odds are you'll have the choice to fire one of your Senators. Reformatting the White House will probably take another couple of years, when its automatic reboot timer expires.
NYC hasn't had much reports of vote fraud, though of course that's hard to tell whether it doesn't exist, or is just well executed. The R/D conflict is certainly strong upstate, and also in the City with over a decade of Republican mayors (certainly not the first) despite a Democratic machine.
But we do vote on these mechanical booths that seem simple and old in design, discouraging tampering. However, we're going to dump them for digital machines starting perhaps next month, under the corrupt HAVA that bribes and coerces districts to move to these clearly too-risky machines.
I don't expect politicians to be "trustworthy". I expect our system to catch people, to keep them easily caught, when they do wrong. The main guarantor is the media, which is supposed to constantly investigate from a presumption of guilt. NYC has enough independent media that we do get a fair amount of that. But there certainly is corruption, as long as they keep the system sustainable. If only we were respecting that tradition in Washington, I'd have only moral outrage, rather than self-preservation, fueling my criticism.
I'm still not getting you. My Palm Treo 650 is the same form factor size as my nonphone PDAs. So are the Windows versions. Smartphones are basically PDAs with "voice networking".
You don't need to be a Republican, but I'm still waiting to hear of any defrauded elections that elected a Democrat since, say, Republicans took over the House in 1994, over a decade ago.
I live in NYC - we know about machine politics, ward heelers and all kinds of fraud. But no evidence of them lately. The Chicago examples that people usually think of are ancient history. We're talking about criminal fraud happening next month, by those doing it in the past 2-10 years. That sounds like "Republicans" to me.
I would agree. But I've served on boards that specifically exclude the execs from liability protection when indicted for crimes that injure the corporation, etc.
It's notable that HP's corporate "liability veil" doesn't protect these execs.
I'd like to know whether HP's insurance or other compensation will pay to defend these execs. And I'm not even an HP shareholder - I bet they're really interested.
Who's going to flame me, the people cracking voting machines for the past 6+ years? Or the people reading the reports of Republicans doing that? Or Democrats scared I'm exposing their grand plan (for which there is no evidence other than my casual wondering)?
Probably TrollMods just see "Republicans are getting more than their share of the benefit", and the zombie army starts downmodding.
Well, I did additionally remark that TrollMods were defending these Sudanese government tyrants' honor over that of a 2-term US president. And then I equated the current US regime to their Qaeda soulmates. So maybe I just appealed to a killer American concoction of authoritarians and government conspiracists.
I smell a winning new political party. "-1, Insightful Party" in 2008!
Ross Perot's campaign was run by a guy named Orson Swindle. That's exactly the kind of name a prank cracker could throw an election to. But Swindle's name reflects more the establishment already cracking votes for power. In fact, with Perot's business empire based on his starting and owning giant data system network EDS, I wouldn't be surprised if Perot were already cracking the vote to get his past totals, and maybe just waiting patiently for a "surprise landslide" in 2008.
"worry about congressional teen molestors, not child molestors"
Teenagers under 18, or whatever the age of consent is in their state, are children. Molesting them is child molesting. Foley molested a 16 year old in Florida, under the age of consent. He's a child molester.
Anonymous Republican pedophile Coward, the disgusting filth you Republicans are spewing to protect this child molester to protect one of "your" Florida House seat, just one of 230/435, is extremely educational. You'll gladly sacrifice child Congressional pages to your Republican child molesters, because Republicans don't care about other people's children. As we see every day Republicans keep other people's children, many about the same age as Foley's victims, killing and dying in Iraq to protect Republican political power and war profiteering.
You people are subhuman monsters. Republican pedophile.
Of course they will. That "natural selection" of political speech in the media environment has (d)evolved it into the useless ruler of the meme pool now governing us.
Before we ever actually produce "artificial intelligence", the machines will have taken over. Maybe we're better off, since politics is a job for computers, not humans, just like chess.
I wonder if any "patriotic" Americans crackers will hack the digital machines collecting/counting votes in the upcoming election to favor Democrats in response to all the reports the past 6+ years that Republicans are getting more than their share of the benefit.
Slashdot Mirror
Mainly because that comic coined the phrase back in 1995.
So Robert McMillan of IDG digs up a small competitor to Google Code, who says actually publishing open source is bad. Of course, the point of open source is that anyone, not just motivated attackers, can inspect the source to reveal problems, and even fix them ourselves.
Fortify doesn't seem to offer GPL or any other open source for its own product. But it does seem to publish its own version of Google Code's results. Which any worthwhile reporter would have learned, if they wanted to tell us a story about the risks of open source, rather than a competitor's story of how "Google is Evil".
In our ongoing "Soft War" with China, Jack Abramoff and Dennis Hastert are a double agents.
It's like a James Bond story, if Bond were a child molester posing as a religious gangster.
"On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog." - P. Steiner
Why should Google be any different from any other sales "person"? When they actually sell your stuff, they're heroes. When they just give it away for free, or annoy you without selling anything, they're villains.
Google shouldn't be able to transmit copies of content without the copyright holder allowing that, but when they do so and make money for those holders (without reducing money those holders make elsewhere), they won't get many complaints.
Of course, while copyrights stop copying well past the length required to protect the motivation for producing them, and stop the fair uses (including indexing for referrals), it's hard to be sympathetic about violations of what are really "copyprivileges", rather than real "rights".
Moderation -1
100% Flamebait
I point out the simple logical fallacy in the article that hides Republican "kill the messenger" tricks, which fallacy slimes a popular 2-term US president, and my post is "Flamebait"?
Republican TrollMods have gotten so addicted to power that they can't stand seeing it crack in front of their faces.
Can someone show me where "Mark Foley, George Allen, and Bill Clinton" or their supporters attacked their accusers solely on their motivations?
OK, Foley and Allen, but not Clinton.
How about where "Mark Foley, George Allen, and Bill Clinton" were attacked by their accusers solely on their motivations?
OK, Clinton but not Foley and Allen.
And how about showing me some distinction between Web vs TV criticism, more or less attacking solely motivations?
Right - about the same for both. Though Web criticism, even faster paced than TV (without a rigid broadcast schedule and filler commercials), does happen sooner. Especially because more of the process from the originators can be seen on the Web, rather than just the eventual "final product" on TV.
Looked at without the Republican corporate mass media agenda to confuse the issues, the actual trend is clear. Republicans attack messengers because the negative messages are usually true. And the Web is faster and more "raw" than TV, so those attacks start there.
The election of people unfit to lead is left as an exercise to the reader.
Condensation catchments were developed over many generations in arid climates. I bet none of these industrial capacity systems have any projection what sucking the scarce moisture from the air for troops will do to the rest of the extremely fragile desert ecosystem that also depends on it. Maybe that's why so many of the places humans have lived longest are now deserts.
"these pictures become laughable after 20 years. Not for Royal Philips Electronics"
Right, because of course in the future RPE will have been the first company to predict the actual future, not just today's future. They're just different from all the others, just because.
Unless they opened this exhibit in 1986, and predicted a future of cellphones ruining movies, Internet porn replacing TV, theocrats destroying science, and no flying cars. Oh, and a 1986-future-2006 with people still believing "* of the Future" exhibits are real predictions, instead of marketing whatever can't be justified to do in the present.
The missing field in that CNN list of VCs, what they'll buy and what they'll pay, is "What they'll let you keep:". When a VC gives you money to startup a company, they get most of the equity in the company. So they can sell it when (if) its value goes up on the value of the product you develop. They'll make you spend that money you get from them on developing their company. Expenses and operations designed to increase the apparent value of their company, even when that doesn't reflect the actual value of the product. And with the majority ownership, they'll make "your" company do whatever they want, including fire you. While they keep everything you contributed to the corporation. If you're lucky, the new guys will make the company worth enough that you'll get something when they sell it. But of course they'll probably dilute your ownership by issuing "new shares" to new investors, from which they'll keep the money.
And the majority of the corporations they "invest in" fail - justified only by the few that pay for the whole lot.
It's not always like that, not on every point. But that's the way to bet: the VCs certainly do.
By all means listen to what they want. But if you can do it without VC money, do it. Or just make sure to sell them only minority stakes, and don't get diluted out of power over your own vision.
"drive and check e-mail at the same time. That's vastly safer than drivers looking down and taking one or both hands off the wheel to play with their BlackBerry" - Jonathan Fram
This fool wants to pay people to put email in the hands of people driving down the road. These are people who can't drive their giant SUVs already, read signs, use their signals. He thinks putting their Blackberries in a virtual page on the rear end of the car in front will be safe, not just make them tailgate even more.
Combining the yuppie inability to spell in email with the yuppie inability to drive in traffic. This guy should win the Darwin Awards as sponsor of fish bicycles.
Of course there are bad "apples" in every industry, in every country. That's why we have laws against bad "apples", government oversight of industry, reporting requirements, consumer watchdogs... a whole infrastructure the people use to protect ourselves from irresponsible and criminal corporations.
US corporations often avoid handling data inside the US because even our crude and inadequate privacy laws still add costs and risks to those operations, but overseas there's little to no risk to the US operation that dispatches the profits (or at least extracts them from our pockets).
Real privacy laws in the US would protect Americans from corporations sending data overseas avoiding US controls. And good ones would make the entire chain required to protect the strongest link in the dataflow, rather than letting everything spill out the weakest.
We'd protect our privacy, and protect our jobs that treat private data right. If we forced foreign competitors to pay the full cost of the privacy protections we require, we'd have a truly global workforce we could use, rather than letting the world work against us at our expense.
Moderation -1
100% Flamebait
TrollMods don't want you to know that you can feel safer by voting in a month, on TUE November 7, 2006, to fire your representative and probably your senator, too.
Because TrollMods are Republicans, and your representative and senators are probably Republicans, too.
TrollMods have faith in security by obscurity, especially when securing elections for a Permanent Republican Majority.
Five years of George "The Genius" Bush protecting us. Revamped all our security into "Homeland Security", reorganized all our intelligence systems, got a Republican Congress to do whatever he wanted. Now we're starting to see how rampant insecurity has rotted his huge government from the inside.
Feel safer?
Vote to fire or keep your Representative on TUE November 7, 2006 (one month from tomorrow). Odds are you'll have the choice to fire one of your Senators. Reformatting the White House will probably take another couple of years, when its automatic reboot timer expires.
That would mean holding government people to the same laws as civilians. When do we do that?
NYC hasn't had much reports of vote fraud, though of course that's hard to tell whether it doesn't exist, or is just well executed. The R/D conflict is certainly strong upstate, and also in the City with over a decade of Republican mayors (certainly not the first) despite a Democratic machine.
But we do vote on these mechanical booths that seem simple and old in design, discouraging tampering. However, we're going to dump them for digital machines starting perhaps next month, under the corrupt HAVA that bribes and coerces districts to move to these clearly too-risky machines.
I don't expect politicians to be "trustworthy". I expect our system to catch people, to keep them easily caught, when they do wrong. The main guarantor is the media, which is supposed to constantly investigate from a presumption of guilt. NYC has enough independent media that we do get a fair amount of that. But there certainly is corruption, as long as they keep the system sustainable. If only we were respecting that tradition in Washington, I'd have only moral outrage, rather than self-preservation, fueling my criticism.
I'm still not getting you. My Palm Treo 650 is the same form factor size as my nonphone PDAs. So are the Windows versions. Smartphones are basically PDAs with "voice networking".
You don't need to be a Republican, but I'm still waiting to hear of any defrauded elections that elected a Democrat since, say, Republicans took over the House in 1994, over a decade ago.
I live in NYC - we know about machine politics, ward heelers and all kinds of fraud. But no evidence of them lately. The Chicago examples that people usually think of are ancient history. We're talking about criminal fraud happening next month, by those doing it in the past 2-10 years. That sounds like "Republicans" to me.
I would agree. But I've served on boards that specifically exclude the execs from liability protection when indicted for crimes that injure the corporation, etc.
It's notable that HP's corporate "liability veil" doesn't protect these execs.
I'd like to know whether HP's insurance or other compensation will pay to defend these execs. And I'm not even an HP shareholder - I bet they're really interested.
Moderation -1
100% Flamebait
Who's going to flame me, the people cracking voting machines for the past 6+ years? Or the people reading the reports of Republicans doing that? Or Democrats scared I'm exposing their grand plan (for which there is no evidence other than my casual wondering)?
Probably TrollMods just see "Republicans are getting more than their share of the benefit", and the zombie army starts downmodding.
Well, I did additionally remark that TrollMods were defending these Sudanese government tyrants' honor over that of a 2-term US president. And then I equated the current US regime to their Qaeda soulmates. So maybe I just appealed to a killer American concoction of authoritarians and government conspiracists.
I smell a winning new political party. "-1, Insightful Party" in 2008!
Ross Perot's campaign was run by a guy named Orson Swindle. That's exactly the kind of name a prank cracker could throw an election to. But Swindle's name reflects more the establishment already cracking votes for power. In fact, with Perot's business empire based on his starting and owning giant data system network EDS, I wouldn't be surprised if Perot were already cracking the vote to get his past totals, and maybe just waiting patiently for a "surprise landslide" in 2008.
"worry about congressional teen molestors, not child molestors"
Teenagers under 18, or whatever the age of consent is in their state, are children. Molesting them is child molesting. Foley molested a 16 year old in Florida, under the age of consent. He's a child molester.
Anonymous Republican pedophile Coward, the disgusting filth you Republicans are spewing to protect this child molester to protect one of "your" Florida House seat, just one of 230/435, is extremely educational. You'll gladly sacrifice child Congressional pages to your Republican child molesters, because Republicans don't care about other people's children. As we see every day Republicans keep other people's children, many about the same age as Foley's victims, killing and dying in Iraq to protect Republican political power and war profiteering.
You people are subhuman monsters. Republican pedophile.
Of course they will. That "natural selection" of political speech in the media environment has (d)evolved it into the useless ruler of the meme pool now governing us.
Before we ever actually produce "artificial intelligence", the machines will have taken over. Maybe we're better off, since politics is a job for computers, not humans, just like chess.
I wonder if any "patriotic" Americans crackers will hack the digital machines collecting/counting votes in the upcoming election to favor Democrats in response to all the reports the past 6+ years that Republicans are getting more than their share of the benefit.