FTA, the car owner said she set "the timer" to start charging at midnight. Where is this timer, in the car or on the charger connection? Maybe she is using one of those $4 light timers. Does anyone know if the Tesla can turn on its own charging system at some designated time? For that matter, how does the Tesla know what time it is? The fire department might be familiar with historic causes of fires, but (1) hardly any fireman knows anything about electricity as such, and (2) they could scarcely know anything about garage fires associated with electric cars, since so far we only know of somewhere in the vicinity of one happening.
My Ford PHEV does this, one presumes the Tesla can as well. Rates are cheaper at midnight, so it's a common feature in PHEVs and EVs.
Cars have relatively advanced computers these days, and one of the things those computers contain is a clock.
I think they should just throw/burn the private key away, and let those coins join the mass of other coins that were lost by early adopters.
That'd be stupid. Keeping it away would have the same effect (getting the coins out of circulation) while allowing them to use the bitcoins in the future if they so desire. Or maybe they'll give the bitcoins to the CIA, who could start paying terrorists (I mean, freedom fighters) with bitcoins instead of dollars.
Or dump them en masse on the exchanges, sit back, and watch Bitcoin destroy itself.
You and I pay about $5 for a ethernet cable off of Newegg.com, the government pays $150 for that same 6ft cable.
So that $10 million works out to a whopping dozen computer systems at government purchase rates.
The government doesn't actually pay exorbitant amounts of money for things. They need to buy something for $150 but don't want anyone to know they've bought it, or they have exhausted their budget allocation for that particular widget, or they want to bypass a lengthy approval process, so they just claim it's something else instead.
with companies less profitable than google? Mac's are expensive most people don't own Mac's personally lots of people use personal computers to VPN to work how would it work with the files on file servers people use to get work done? like MS Access databases?
About 30% of the folks in my company run Macs. In terms of sheer numbers not as many as Google but still multiple tens of thousands of users. We do use Microsoft's productivity suite extensively but use native versions of Office where we can, and Windows in a VM where we can't. I can't remember the last time I had to fire up my VM, though. The native VPN client works great, and I can also natively access CIFS file shares just fine.
Completely agreed on the unreasonable extremes people go to when they say correlation is not causation. By their logic, smoking does not cause cancer and asprin does not reduce fever. Just because we can't fully explain the connection between A and B does not mean one doesn't exist.
Just because they do things you don't agree with doesn't mean they aren't activists. Being an activist, criminal, and "asshat" are not mutually exclusive and depending on your viewpoint a lot of activists are asshats. I'm sure that in the US there were some white southerners who considered MLK Jr. to be an asshat. Lot's of people consider Greenpeace and PETA to be both activists and asshats. Lots of people consider the ACLU to be activists and asshats. Lots of people dont.
How many of those you named in comparison specifically and exclusively use only illegal methods to attempt to further their causes?
The objective here isn't to punish anyone proportionally to the crimes they committed. The whole point of online activists having the book thrown at them is to deter future activists.
The corporations already feel like meatspace activists have too many rights, so it is imperative to set a precedent that online activism will be dealt with harshly.
Have we established the Anonymous are activists? They call themselves activists, but their actions are those of a bunch of asshats who believed that if enough asshats do their asshattery in unison none of them will be caught and punished. I have a hard time telling the difference between Anonymous and 4chan.
If they were only trolling posters on the Facebook page, how would they figure out their IP addresses? Impossible unless they hacked into Facebook.
The article is crap. It's basically a bunch of unsubstantiated allegations without even a shred of evidence. It's possible BP did the things they claim, but I cannot fathom why they would. Delete comments, sure, but threaten bodily harm? What would be the point?
You steal my personal data, sell it to someone else who uses that data to commit crimes, you are a dangerous person.
Your data is not personal if it has ever been shared outside of machines you own. If your data can be used by someone else to harm you or others, then the insecure system is what is dangerous, not the alleged criminal. We're going to have to come around and face the facts. It's not the hackers that are misunderstood: People don't understand the nature of information.
Data wants to be stolen! Just look at the way it's dressed!
Sorry, try again. None of the cars you listed are capable of what you claim. Here's a list to help you [http://www.torquestats.com/index.php?pid=mph60_100].
So if your last job was being an accountant with access to bank accounts, you left, then later your ex-boss contacts you and tell you to give the account information to the janitors. You see no problem with this?
Hi, I'm your ex-boss. I want you to give secret information to people who should not have that information. Just trust me, nothing fishy going on here.
Is that the best horrible analogy you could come up with?
I disagree. It's dangerous to give a blanket statement that all the work belongs to them by default.
What work?
I've been in several situations in which I participated on other projects outside of work which used not a single work resource. It's too damn easy to claim you did it while on site or using work property.
That's why it went all the way to the board one time when I steadfastly refused to sign any agreement with them since the language was so overwhelmingly vague and if I patented a coffee napkin idea at home it was theirs. Nothing happened since I they could not afford to let me go at all.
I would prefer that nothing is decided in anyone's favor by default and must be proved in a court of law (no arbitration).
A non-compete agreement does not work for me as an independent contractor. Unless you pay me extremely well i'm not going to lock myself out of an entire market.
Ohh, and I guess that since I only work in Open Source it's kind of a moot point. It's rather funny when I explain that they don't actually own anything I make for them at all, and I don't either:)
What I said is what you do for your employer, in the context of this discussion around Terry Childs. Configuring routers and assigning administrative access controls to them is definitely not a personal project, even though Terry acted like it was. He even attempted to copyright his configurations.
Point taken on personal projects, and everyone I've worked for has been fine with the ones I've worked on, including my own meager and forgettable contributions to FOSS.
If they had physical access to the systems, they should have been able to reset the passwords. Now, if he was intentionally prohibiting them from accessing the systems, after being fired, then he was doing something criminal. If, on the other hand, he was withholding passwords while working there - and being tasked with security for the network - then he did nothing wrong.
Of course they had physical access. To hundreds of individual devices scattered throughout a large city, requiring weeks and hundreds of hours to touch them all. Don't forget you have to power-cycle the devices to do a password recovery, so all that work has to happen during non-critical hours. Terry decided that a poorly written internal security policy document would serve him as a legal shield while he stood on his, arguably, warped principals. Terry was very, very wrong.
I don't care if you made them up, they are the property of your employer.
Now the stupid thing here is Terry doesn't just engage in "burning bridges", but does it with himself standing in the middle. I can't feel pity for this fool.
It's interesting that this seems to be the prevailing opinion now. But when this all went down, Terry Childs was the Slashdot Poster Child. Why have opinions changed?
At the time people bought into Terry's argument that he was Don Quixote, saving the incompetent management from themselves. Admins good! PHBs bad! But then he was forced to hand over the passwords and San Francisco did not revert to the stone age as their entire electronic infrastructure melted down around them, as he expected. So Terry was wrong, and now he's just an asshole with a god complex doing time.
P.S. He was an asshole with a god complex back then, too. Now he's just better understood.
Not in anyway similar. If you take the keys to their trucks you are stealing but if you stop work there is no theft involved. If you want me to talk to you then that is work and I no longer work for you. You should have implemented a better system when I was employed for you. To take this into the real world, what would have happened if he had been killed in a traffic accident? The same procedure that would go into place in such an event should also work during a dismissal. If you do not have such a procedure do not blame the guy that you just sacked as that would make as much sense as blaming a dead guy. It is your fault.
That's an incredibly simplistic and incorrect understanding of intellectual property and work ownership. What you do for your employer while you work for them belongs to them, unless you have a specific agreement stating otherwise. Just because you don't work there anymore doesn't relieve you of your obligation to give them back their property, which in this case was the command and control of their own network infrastructure.
Should we expect a lawsuit or do they have a licensing agreement with Nestlé? (It's very indicative of the time we live in that this is the first thought that came to my mind...)
Slashdot Mirror
FTA, the car owner said she set "the timer" to start charging at midnight. Where is this timer, in the car or on the charger connection? Maybe she is using one of those $4 light timers. Does anyone know if the Tesla can turn on its own charging system at some designated time? For that matter, how does the Tesla know what time it is? The fire department might be familiar with historic causes of fires, but (1) hardly any fireman knows anything about electricity as such, and (2) they could scarcely know anything about garage fires associated with electric cars, since so far we only know of somewhere in the vicinity of one happening.
My Ford PHEV does this, one presumes the Tesla can as well. Rates are cheaper at midnight, so it's a common feature in PHEVs and EVs.
Cars have relatively advanced computers these days, and one of the things those computers contain is a clock.
I think they should just throw/burn the private key away, and let those coins join the mass of other coins that were lost by early adopters.
That'd be stupid. Keeping it away would have the same effect (getting the coins out of circulation) while allowing them to use the bitcoins in the future if they so desire. Or maybe they'll give the bitcoins to the CIA, who could start paying terrorists (I mean, freedom fighters) with bitcoins instead of dollars.
Or dump them en masse on the exchanges, sit back, and watch Bitcoin destroy itself.
You and I pay about $5 for a ethernet cable off of Newegg.com, the government pays $150 for that same 6ft cable.
So that $10 million works out to a whopping dozen computer systems at government purchase rates.
The government doesn't actually pay exorbitant amounts of money for things. They need to buy something for $150 but don't want anyone to know they've bought it, or they have exhausted their budget allocation for that particular widget, or they want to bypass a lengthy approval process, so they just claim it's something else instead.
with companies less profitable than google?
Mac's are expensive
most people don't own Mac's personally
lots of people use personal computers to VPN to work
how would it work with the files on file servers people use to get work done? like MS Access databases?
About 30% of the folks in my company run Macs. In terms of sheer numbers not as many as Google but still multiple tens of thousands of users. We do use Microsoft's productivity suite extensively but use native versions of Office where we can, and Windows in a VM where we can't. I can't remember the last time I had to fire up my VM, though. The native VPN client works great, and I can also natively access CIFS file shares just fine.
Completely agreed on the unreasonable extremes people go to when they say correlation is not causation. By their logic, smoking does not cause cancer and asprin does not reduce fever. Just because we can't fully explain the connection between A and B does not mean one doesn't exist.
Already ONE single bitcoin is worth over $1000, so how do they get a total market cap of just $1300???
Obviously they are referring to the value of a single Bitcoin. Although that still doesn't explain their math.
Death for Stealing a truck.
that's not poetic justice, or poetic, or justice.
Poetic justice would have been if the truck they stole had been stolen and they got pulled over because of the first theft.
I"m more worried about the scum that thing Justice for stealing a truck is death then I am about people who steal trucks.
Please learn to apply critical thinking skills to you're current mode of what I will generously call thinking.
You forgot the bit where they beat the shit out of the drivers. Not saying that evens things out, but this wasn't exactly a harmless little crime.
Just because they do things you don't agree with doesn't mean they aren't activists. Being an activist, criminal, and "asshat" are not mutually exclusive and depending on your viewpoint a lot of activists are asshats. I'm sure that in the US there were some white southerners who considered MLK Jr. to be an asshat. Lot's of people consider Greenpeace and PETA to be both activists and asshats. Lots of people consider the ACLU to be activists and asshats. Lots of people dont.
How many of those you named in comparison specifically and exclusively use only illegal methods to attempt to further their causes?
The objective here isn't to punish anyone proportionally to the crimes they committed. The whole point of online activists having the book thrown at them is to deter future activists.
The corporations already feel like meatspace activists have too many rights, so it is imperative to set a precedent that online activism will be dealt with harshly.
Have we established the Anonymous are activists? They call themselves activists, but their actions are those of a bunch of asshats who believed that if enough asshats do their asshattery in unison none of them will be caught and punished. I have a hard time telling the difference between Anonymous and 4chan.
so... how well does it pay at Ogilvy & Mather?
I've no idea, since I'm not a professional idiot. How is the amateur circuit going for you?
If they were only trolling posters on the Facebook page, how would they figure out their IP addresses? Impossible unless they hacked into Facebook.
The article is crap. It's basically a bunch of unsubstantiated allegations without even a shred of evidence. It's possible BP did the things they claim, but I cannot fathom why they would. Delete comments, sure, but threaten bodily harm? What would be the point?
please.... home clouds can be just as much a proof of concept as an enterprise cloud. how much do you put into it is what counts
Shirley you can't be serious.
You steal my personal data, sell it to someone else who uses that data to commit crimes, you are a dangerous person.
Your data is not personal if it has ever been shared outside of machines you own. If your data can be used by someone else to harm you or others, then the insecure system is what is dangerous, not the alleged criminal. We're going to have to come around and face the facts. It's not the hackers that are misunderstood: People don't understand the nature of information.
Data wants to be stolen! Just look at the way it's dressed!
So they're getting crowd-funded money to do all their testing to ensure no one can see the NSA's back doors they have in place.
So what's your answer? Everyone just does their own code review?
If you want to hurt Card, don't buy his books. That's how he makes money. The film deal was done a LONG time ago.
A successful film will drive increased sales of his books to a new audience.
Sorry, try again. None of the cars you listed are capable of what you claim. Here's a list to help you [http://www.torquestats.com/index.php?pid=mph60_100].
Oh my, a very hyped up and expensive car .. can go ... a lot slower than other, cheaper cars. ...
Definately newsworthy
Dang fanboys http://tech.slashdot.org/story/13/11/05/173223/tesla-model-s-can-hit-at-least-132-mph-on-the-autobahn#
Pardon me, but what cheaper sedan goes from 60-100MPH in less than five seconds?
It's quick. But an Ariel Atom is 'very impressive'. 0-100, 5.4 seconds.
The Atom is missing certain luxury elements in order to achieve it's admittedly extremely fast acceleration. Like windows. And a roof.
So if your last job was being an accountant with access to bank accounts, you left, then later your ex-boss contacts you and tell you to give the account information to the janitors. You see no problem with this?
Hi, I'm your ex-boss. I want you to give secret information to people who should not have that information. Just trust me, nothing fishy going on here.
Is that the best horrible analogy you could come up with?
I disagree. It's dangerous to give a blanket statement that all the work belongs to them by default.
What work?
I've been in several situations in which I participated on other projects outside of work which used not a single work resource. It's too damn easy to claim you did it while on site or using work property.
That's why it went all the way to the board one time when I steadfastly refused to sign any agreement with them since the language was so overwhelmingly vague and if I patented a coffee napkin idea at home it was theirs. Nothing happened since I they could not afford to let me go at all.
I would prefer that nothing is decided in anyone's favor by default and must be proved in a court of law (no arbitration).
A non-compete agreement does not work for me as an independent contractor. Unless you pay me extremely well i'm not going to lock myself out of an entire market.
Ohh, and I guess that since I only work in Open Source it's kind of a moot point. It's rather funny when I explain that they don't actually own anything I make for them at all, and I don't either :)
What I said is what you do for your employer, in the context of this discussion around Terry Childs. Configuring routers and assigning administrative access controls to them is definitely not a personal project, even though Terry acted like it was. He even attempted to copyright his configurations.
Point taken on personal projects, and everyone I've worked for has been fine with the ones I've worked on, including my own meager and forgettable contributions to FOSS.
If they had physical access to the systems, they should have been able to reset the passwords. Now, if he was intentionally prohibiting them from accessing the systems, after being fired, then he was doing something criminal. If, on the other hand, he was withholding passwords while working there - and being tasked with security for the network - then he did nothing wrong.
Of course they had physical access. To hundreds of individual devices scattered throughout a large city, requiring weeks and hundreds of hours to touch them all. Don't forget you have to power-cycle the devices to do a password recovery, so all that work has to happen during non-critical hours. Terry decided that a poorly written internal security policy document would serve him as a legal shield while he stood on his, arguably, warped principals. Terry was very, very wrong.
I don't care if you made them up, they are the property of your employer.
Now the stupid thing here is Terry doesn't just engage in "burning bridges", but does it with himself standing in the middle. I can't feel pity for this fool.
It's interesting that this seems to be the prevailing opinion now. But when this all went down, Terry Childs was the Slashdot Poster Child. Why have opinions changed?
At the time people bought into Terry's argument that he was Don Quixote, saving the incompetent management from themselves. Admins good! PHBs bad! But then he was forced to hand over the passwords and San Francisco did not revert to the stone age as their entire electronic infrastructure melted down around them, as he expected. So Terry was wrong, and now he's just an asshole with a god complex doing time.
P.S. He was an asshole with a god complex back then, too. Now he's just better understood.
Not in anyway similar. If you take the keys to their trucks you are stealing but if you stop work there is no theft involved. If you want me to talk to you then that is work and I no longer work for you. You should have implemented a better system when I was employed for you. To take this into the real world, what would have happened if he had been killed in a traffic accident? The same procedure that would go into place in such an event should also work during a dismissal. If you do not have such a procedure do not blame the guy that you just sacked as that would make as much sense as blaming a dead guy. It is your fault.
That's an incredibly simplistic and incorrect understanding of intellectual property and work ownership. What you do for your employer while you work for them belongs to them, unless you have a specific agreement stating otherwise. Just because you don't work there anymore doesn't relieve you of your obligation to give them back their property, which in this case was the command and control of their own network infrastructure.
But good luck with that.
Should we expect a lawsuit or do they have a licensing agreement with Nestlé? (It's very indicative of the time we live in that this is the first thought that came to my mind...)
The latter. http://techcrunch.com/2013/09/03/google-strikes-bizarre-licensing-deal-with-nestle-to-name-next-android-kit-kat/
"only the officers are in harms way,"
Clueless much?
It's not a completely true statement, and there are many examples of exceptions, but it's largely true.