If y'all would RTFM, then you would find the information readily available.
In short: You can use their application, or you can use IMAP or POP3 if you want.
Attachment limit is 25MB, and they say storage is "unlimited".
The major concerns would be.... (1) They are free, but ad-supported, so will you get spammed?, And
(2) Will the service still be available and free under substantially similar terms using the same internet domain,
a few years from now?
In other words.... basically the same concerns one should have using the free Gmail service.
really? you are able to NEGOTIATE with a company, these days?
It's not really a negotiation... it's about them offering you a cell phone because they think it would be mutually beneficial that you have a company phone, And you rejecting that offer after hours, and owning a personal cell phone instead, or a BYOD device, because of the privacy invasion making it non-mutually beneficial to carry company-owned equipment 24x7.
Those are crimes. All of society has a stake in those.
Some companies and organizations also have codes of ethics and moral standards, that their employees are required to adhere to, and they could also be terminated based on moral turpitude.
E.g. In some organizations, merely attending a strip club or other verboten activity on your personal time could be grounds for dismissal, so it's not necessarily just crimes.
Also, for instance... if a Catholic priest preaches something contrary to church teachings, then they can ultimately be subject to defrocking, even if it was off the clock, before a private non-work-related gathering that they were witnessed doing so.
These are not things that all society has a stake in, per se.
But the violation of the moral standards means the employee may not be a good fit for the organization, or they may be in effect working against the company or competing with the company's objectives.
Maybe the US of A should put more money into public schools, infrastructure and public service instead of F-22's.
The only difference between putting the money in education or defense is which set of bureaucrats, corrupt administrators, industry partners, and union members get to line their pockets.
I see universities and elementary schools a like --- when they get extra money, more of the additional cash goes to landscaping, campus beautification, and to massively wasteful injudicious technology spending --- such as networking equipment, computers, or software they can't actually use -- but they got the windfall $$$ (Probably spent with contractors and "Value-Added" Resellers that are somehow related to someone important in the decision making process), than is spent on resources that directly affect education.
This should have been her negotiating position:
If you have to track the phone, then I am going to stop using it and start using a personal phone that you cannot track.
I insist that you turn the tracking off when I am not working, or put it in writing that I myself may turn the tracking off when I am not working.
Otherwise, I am going to secure the phone when I am not working, and you will not be able to contact me while I am off-duty,
except to leave voicemail or e-mail for me to read during my next shift.
TLDR: there are more assholes than hobbyist cartographers.
Why not develop a test to detect hobbyist cartographers?
They could start by requiring would-be submitters to prove their identity and use an Android
device to visit the location to prove that they've physically been within the geographical neighborhood
in the past 90 days, before they are able to submit edits to an area.
Next they should have some process by which good editors earn rank, and new users' submissions get reviewed
by the community --- of course, whoever reviews them has to be someone who's visited the physical vicinity of the addition / edit.
If there has been a recent correction requested to the map; they can prompt other users of Google maps who map out a destination
or approach an area, to please confirm if there is something wrong with the map.
That's what Google *claim* but, as I mentioned in a previous post, there are some channels against which I've filed up to a *dozen* copyright complaints against and they're still there
Have you considered the possibility that, since you're not Microsoft, Sony, or BMG, and
you've filed more than 2 or 3 complaints, that their systems might have automatically made a decision that the reports are suspicious as possible spam / not to listen to your complaints, esp. if a few of the scammers appealed the complaints with YT or the scammers / pirates got them cleared claiming Fair Use?
Thanks to Google's indifference, the pirates can continue to sell ebooks no matter how many times copyright holders might complain..... If Google takes a pirated ebook down in response to a DMCA notice, the pirates simply upload another
Interesting... and woefully inconsistent with how Google handles copyright in other places.
One alleged copyright violation; innocent or not, on Youtube, and your account is crippled,
you lose the ability to post videos more than 5 minutes and a bunch of other things.
Two strikes, and they take your channel down and ban you for a few weeks.
Three strikes, and you're gone forever.
All 3 strikes can be received from one video, or in a short period of time, for example when Microsoft goes back and starts randomly posting copyright strikes against anyone that posted videos mentioning Windows 8.
And there is no recourse..... your only way out is if the MPAA or RIAA or whoever was responsible for the strike decides to retract it.
On the other hand... Google play is fast and loose on copyright and just lets the real bad guys re-upload blatantly pirated books, really??
When you hire a programmer, designer, or engineer, they are expected to have a brain, make special effort and be creative (inovative) in thier solutions.
Nonsense. The ordinary ability of an average programmer is what is part of the job description, not the "special talents" of peculiarly good programmers, i.e. those in the top 70%.
As evidenced..... the latter are generally paid no more than the former, the extra creativity and talent of spectacular programmers does not factor into the work arrangement ---- if it did, then you would have entry-level programmers starting at $500,000 a year, when their creative input results in a product worth $1.7 million a year in revenue instead of $1million a year in revenue.
Often entry-level programmers are not paid an amount commensurate with any special talents,
and businesses are paying them for time spent working only --- not time spent doing mental-focused labor required for the programming, that often occurs outside business hours, anyways
You are putting nothing into this other than the time you are spending to produce the code, and that time is being paid for by somebody else.
He is presumably putting the special efforts of his own brain and creativity into it; which is not merely hours of manual labor.
And presumably the work he is creating is useful to the employer, so they should be satisfied to be able to use the work
he is creating.
Some companies might be willing to negotiate rights ownership of the product to the developer,
in exchange for an unlimited license for the company's internal usage, And reduced pay for the developer.
E.g. "Your pay will be reduced by 50%, or you the developer will pay us a big lump sum, but in exchange, you will own the software you create and we only get a copy of the source code a non-revokable, unlimited, non-exclusive transferrible license to use, modify, and prepare derivative works of the software for internal usage by us and our private business partners, revenue generation and our internal commercial purposes."
On the other hand..... the copyright and the rights to sell a copy of the software to someone else or redistribute it is negotiable,
and by default rests with the employer in the absence of an agreement.
Often, the employer might want to keep the software confidential and private for their competitive advantage.
The employer won't necessarily want to give up this right of exclusive ownership; if they're paying for the work, most companies would expect to retain the ownership.... they could just hire another programmer who would (in their opinion) do the same work and leave full ownership with the company.
Boycott such channels. Instead, change the channel to one marked Copy Freely.
Desirable content is occasionally or frequently marked Copy Once, and I have no desire to Boycott content. Anything that can't record it like WMC can is not really a proper DVR in the first place.
imaginative businessmen bypassing the onerous tyranny of regulators.
If by "tyranny of regulators", you mean the fed. providing the Bernake Put and allowing the businessmen to engage in any sort of risky businesses they want, and then steal trillions from taxpayers to bail them out when business goes bad, then sure.
Every crypto is roll your own at some point in its life
At this point in its life; it has no place in new protocol specifications or production systems,
not until the new crypto is published and disseminated by the community and found to have no flaws that any researchers can find.
Even for something as simple as AES it's a chore to find an open implementation that's actively being maintained
No... there are many implementations that are actively maintained; your implementation doesn't have to be Open source, so long
as the implementation of the specified ciphers and hashes is a correct implementation....
It is a small price to pay to use standardized ciphers or standardized implementations known to be secure,
instead of risk everything on a homegrown cipher.
for instance, they can generate a stronger sense of loyalty due to certain well documented psychological effects.
Nice job coming up with a seemingly rational reasoning for initiation rites, which I have no doubt has little to do with why many groups actually do it.
Because it's "fun" for existing members and becomes a "game"; makes them feel more important, and helps establish dominance over junior members.
Also, if they stay within reasonable restraints and keep their antics civil and not involving risky daredevil stunts or public humiliation, it can be relatively harmless.
That's all fine and dandy..... but the courts should not take these groups seriously, or allow them to sue someone for "violating the sanctity" of their group's secrets
If you manage a company with recurrent networking problems / bad work by your networking department... this sounds like an ingenious appliance to put in the network management department / IT team's breakroom. Network Slow = Limited Coffee, Network down = No Coffee.... suddenly people will care.
The company says they now plan to license more outside brands, and bring back “My K-Cup” reusable filters.
If they really believed they were wrong about the things they were actually wrong about,
then they would Open-Source the DRM technology and make the interoperability specs public domain,
and stop trying to charge licensing dollars.
Make them 80 percent complete and leave it to the internet to fill in the remaining 20 percent.
Include some 'extra pieces of material' that render the part unusuable, But which are easily removed, either before printing or using some common tools after printing.
Wouldn't these be considered trade secrets and under the responsibility of the sorority to guard against disclosure?
It's only a trade secret if used to conduct a business. To have a case for an infringement of a trade secret, the plaintiff needs to be able to show damage with financial impact was done by the disclosure.
Seems like there's a good chance the sorority lacks standing to sue on disclosure of such trivialities which are probably
only secret for sentimental reasons.
Now why there are silly things like handshakes and mandatory dress colors is beyond me.
Sororities also attract people who want to create an air of an elitism a "clique",
And people who want to create bureaucracy and control other people -- so they tend to form internal committees
and have member ranks and have a bunch of jobs for "important people", make a bunch of arbitrary rules,
and establish big fines for members who break rules or miss meetings.
This also explains 'hazing' and elaborate initiation procedures.
Slashdot Mirror
If y'all would RTFM, then you would find the information readily available.
In short: You can use their application, or you can use IMAP or POP3 if you want.
Attachment limit is 25MB, and they say storage is "unlimited".
The major concerns would be.... (1) They are free, but ad-supported, so will you get spammed?, And (2) Will the service still be available and free under substantially similar terms using the same internet domain, a few years from now?
In other words.... basically the same concerns one should have using the free Gmail service.
How about if they showed up wearing a T-shirt with "EBOA (Elite Bastard of Alt.Irc)" printed on it ?
really? you are able to NEGOTIATE with a company, these days?
It's not really a negotiation... it's about them offering you a cell phone because they think it would be mutually beneficial that you have a company phone, And you rejecting that offer after hours, and owning a personal cell phone instead, or a BYOD device, because of the privacy invasion making it non-mutually beneficial to carry company-owned equipment 24x7.
Those are crimes. All of society has a stake in those.
Some companies and organizations also have codes of ethics and moral standards, that their employees are required to adhere to, and they could also be terminated based on moral turpitude.
E.g. In some organizations, merely attending a strip club or other verboten activity on your personal time could be grounds for dismissal, so it's not necessarily just crimes.
Also, for instance... if a Catholic priest preaches something contrary to church teachings, then they can ultimately be subject to defrocking, even if it was off the clock, before a private non-work-related gathering that they were witnessed doing so.
These are not things that all society has a stake in, per se. But the violation of the moral standards means the employee may not be a good fit for the organization, or they may be in effect working against the company or competing with the company's objectives.
Maybe the US of A should put more money into public schools, infrastructure and public service instead of F-22's.
The only difference between putting the money in education or defense is which set of bureaucrats, corrupt administrators, industry partners, and union members get to line their pockets.
I see universities and elementary schools a like --- when they get extra money, more of the additional cash goes to landscaping, campus beautification, and to massively wasteful injudicious technology spending --- such as networking equipment, computers, or software they can't actually use -- but they got the windfall $$$ (Probably spent with contractors and "Value-Added" Resellers that are somehow related to someone important in the decision making process), than is spent on resources that directly affect education.
This should have been her negotiating position: If you have to track the phone, then I am going to stop using it and start using a personal phone that you cannot track.
I insist that you turn the tracking off when I am not working, or put it in writing that I myself may turn the tracking off when I am not working.
Otherwise, I am going to secure the phone when I am not working, and you will not be able to contact me while I am off-duty, except to leave voicemail or e-mail for me to read during my next shift.
TLDR: there are more assholes than hobbyist cartographers.
Why not develop a test to detect hobbyist cartographers?
They could start by requiring would-be submitters to prove their identity and use an Android device to visit the location to prove that they've physically been within the geographical neighborhood in the past 90 days, before they are able to submit edits to an area.
Next they should have some process by which good editors earn rank, and new users' submissions get reviewed by the community --- of course, whoever reviews them has to be someone who's visited the physical vicinity of the addition / edit.
If there has been a recent correction requested to the map; they can prompt other users of Google maps who map out a destination or approach an area, to please confirm if there is something wrong with the map.
Never said they were 100% consistent.
That's what Google *claim* but, as I mentioned in a previous post, there are some channels against which I've filed up to a *dozen* copyright complaints against and they're still there
Have you considered the possibility that, since you're not Microsoft, Sony, or BMG, and you've filed more than 2 or 3 complaints, that their systems might have automatically made a decision that the reports are suspicious as possible spam / not to listen to your complaints, esp. if a few of the scammers appealed the complaints with YT or the scammers / pirates got them cleared claiming Fair Use?
Thanks to Google's indifference, the pirates can continue to sell ebooks no matter how many times copyright holders might complain. .... If Google takes a pirated ebook down in response to a DMCA notice, the pirates simply upload another
Interesting... and woefully inconsistent with how Google handles copyright in other places.
One alleged copyright violation; innocent or not, on Youtube, and your account is crippled, you lose the ability to post videos more than 5 minutes and a bunch of other things.
Two strikes, and they take your channel down and ban you for a few weeks.
Three strikes, and you're gone forever.
All 3 strikes can be received from one video, or in a short period of time, for example when Microsoft goes back and starts randomly posting copyright strikes against anyone that posted videos mentioning Windows 8.
And there is no recourse..... your only way out is if the MPAA or RIAA or whoever was responsible for the strike decides to retract it.
On the other hand... Google play is fast and loose on copyright and just lets the real bad guys re-upload blatantly pirated books, really??
When you hire a programmer, designer, or engineer, they are expected to have a brain, make special effort and be creative (inovative) in thier solutions.
Nonsense. The ordinary ability of an average programmer is what is part of the job description, not the "special talents" of peculiarly good programmers, i.e. those in the top 70%.
As evidenced..... the latter are generally paid no more than the former, the extra creativity and talent of spectacular programmers does not factor into the work arrangement ---- if it did, then you would have entry-level programmers starting at $500,000 a year, when their creative input results in a product worth $1.7 million a year in revenue instead of $1million a year in revenue.
Often entry-level programmers are not paid an amount commensurate with any special talents, and businesses are paying them for time spent working only --- not time spent doing mental-focused labor required for the programming, that often occurs outside business hours, anyways
You are putting nothing into this other than the time you are spending to produce the code, and that time is being paid for by somebody else.
He is presumably putting the special efforts of his own brain and creativity into it; which is not merely hours of manual labor.
And presumably the work he is creating is useful to the employer, so they should be satisfied to be able to use the work he is creating.
Some companies might be willing to negotiate rights ownership of the product to the developer, in exchange for an unlimited license for the company's internal usage, And reduced pay for the developer. E.g. "Your pay will be reduced by 50%, or you the developer will pay us a big lump sum, but in exchange, you will own the software you create and we only get a copy of the source code a non-revokable, unlimited, non-exclusive transferrible license to use, modify, and prepare derivative works of the software for internal usage by us and our private business partners, revenue generation and our internal commercial purposes."
On the other hand..... the copyright and the rights to sell a copy of the software to someone else or redistribute it is negotiable, and by default rests with the employer in the absence of an agreement. Often, the employer might want to keep the software confidential and private for their competitive advantage.
The employer won't necessarily want to give up this right of exclusive ownership; if they're paying for the work, most companies would expect to retain the ownership.... they could just hire another programmer who would (in their opinion) do the same work and leave full ownership with the company.
Boycott such channels. Instead, change the channel to one marked Copy Freely.
Desirable content is occasionally or frequently marked Copy Once, and I have no desire to Boycott content. Anything that can't record it like WMC can is not really a proper DVR in the first place.
How can I use Kodi to record CableCard content not marked as Copy Freely, like you can do with HDHR + WMC?
imaginative businessmen bypassing the onerous tyranny of regulators.
If by "tyranny of regulators", you mean the fed. providing the Bernake Put and allowing the businessmen to engage in any sort of risky businesses they want, and then steal trillions from taxpayers to bail them out when business goes bad, then sure.
The "pre-broken" Eliptic curve technology is a backdoored random number generator, not a cipher.
It is not ECC itself that is broken or backdoored, only the Dual_EC_DRBG random number generator with specific input parameters.
Every crypto is roll your own at some point in its life
At this point in its life; it has no place in new protocol specifications or production systems, not until the new crypto is published and disseminated by the community and found to have no flaws that any researchers can find.
Even for something as simple as AES it's a chore to find an open implementation that's actively being maintained
No... there are many implementations that are actively maintained; your implementation doesn't have to be Open source, so long as the implementation of the specified ciphers and hashes is a correct implementation....
It is a small price to pay to use standardized ciphers or standardized implementations known to be secure, instead of risk everything on a homegrown cipher.
You can't just do this without insider help. And by insiders, I mean government officials.
Wouldn't happen here. In Soviet America; Bank robs you!
for instance, they can generate a stronger sense of loyalty due to certain well documented psychological effects.
Nice job coming up with a seemingly rational reasoning for initiation rites, which I have no doubt has little to do with why many groups actually do it.
Because it's "fun" for existing members and becomes a "game"; makes them feel more important, and helps establish dominance over junior members.
Also, if they stay within reasonable restraints and keep their antics civil and not involving risky daredevil stunts or public humiliation, it can be relatively harmless.
That's all fine and dandy..... but the courts should not take these groups seriously, or allow them to sue someone for "violating the sanctity" of their group's secrets
If you manage a company with recurrent networking problems / bad work by your networking department... this sounds like an ingenious appliance to put in the network management department / IT team's breakroom. Network Slow = Limited Coffee, Network down = No Coffee.... suddenly people will care.
The company says they now plan to license more outside brands, and bring back “My K-Cup” reusable filters.
If they really believed they were wrong about the things they were actually wrong about, then they would Open-Source the DRM technology and make the interoperability specs public domain, and stop trying to charge licensing dollars.
Make them 80 percent complete and leave it to the internet to fill in the remaining 20 percent.
Include some 'extra pieces of material' that render the part unusuable, But which are easily removed, either before printing or using some common tools after printing.
Tell that to bruce jenner and the sorority he lives in.
The existence of a few possible theoretical exceptions do not warrant changing the default assumptions.
We also assumed that the sorority members would be humans and not robots, or invaders from the planet Omicron Persei 8.
Also isn't it a sexist to claim that some female released the information that was posted? Reply to This
It's a Sorority, so they would not have any male members allowed to know the information. Such is the way with these organizations.
Wouldn't these be considered trade secrets and under the responsibility of the sorority to guard against disclosure?
It's only a trade secret if used to conduct a business. To have a case for an infringement of a trade secret, the plaintiff needs to be able to show damage with financial impact was done by the disclosure.
Seems like there's a good chance the sorority lacks standing to sue on disclosure of such trivialities which are probably only secret for sentimental reasons.
Now why there are silly things like handshakes and mandatory dress colors is beyond me.
Sororities also attract people who want to create an air of an elitism a "clique", And people who want to create bureaucracy and control other people -- so they tend to form internal committees and have member ranks and have a bunch of jobs for "important people", make a bunch of arbitrary rules, and establish big fines for members who break rules or miss meetings.
This also explains 'hazing' and elaborate initiation procedures.