Just because it's legal for someone to demand money (selling free software is certainly allowed in Germany), doesn't mean you have to pay what they demand. A payment demand hidden in a EULA or AGB (Allgemeine Geschäftsbedingungen) does not mean you've entered a legally binding contract when you clicked on "download". That doesn't mean the scammer is violating the law, unfortunately - but neither do you have to pay.
In general the way to deal with these sites is this: do not react on them contacting you - an IP number and data entered into a web form is not enough for them to get their claim accepted by the court. However if you do respond and admit you downloaded from their site, then they have some more ammunition - not enough, but don't give it to them, anyway. For the IP number to be correlated to your address, they need a German judge to issue an order to your IP provider. Of course the judge won't don't that - these scammers have tried to get orders like that many times, and they've always been unsuccessful. Scammers are not very popular, judges usually don't go out of their way to help them.
So don't communicate with the scammers - wait for the court order (gerichtlicher Mahnbescheid), if they bother to go that far. Once you get the order, tell the court you object. That's it, it doesn't go further than that.
I'm a big fan of OSS. Having said that, I'm not convinced this decision is right. To explain where I'm coming from: I develop computer chips for a living. A tapeout for one of our ASICs costs around $500k, currently. On top of that you have to wait for several weeks before you get a chip from the fab and can evaluate it on a PCB. So it's extremely important for us to find almost all design bugs before tapeout. Usually we reach that goal.
We find bugs by building extensive testbenches (essentially software projects which exercise the design or part of the design), doing formal analysis etc. The verification engineer will normally look at the specification, not at the design-internals. That's done so that he verifies the specification without getting sucked into the design engineers mindset - so he verifies a black box. To be fair: we also use code reviews, but to a limited extent, and it's not a very important tool.
Sometimes parts of the functionality of a chip is certified by an outside organization - that approach is typically used for safety-critical interfaces and things like that. (Our chips are used in automotive applications, so often people's life's depend on the quality of our designs.)
I think the same approach could be used here. This product should be certified - an independent organization should look at it, and through black-box tests determine whether it's reliable or not. Software errors are only one aspect which can fail in such a device anyway - looking at the code you are not going to find out whether a cop with particularly warm hands would affect a sensor (or some other analog component) of the breathalyzer.
Consider for a moment how easy it is to implement a national filtering proxy
Consider how little benefit is created for the actual victims by blocking a single sales channel to some of the child-porn customers. When you actually do something to catch the child molesters, then you could potentially stop abuse. This measure diverts resources from tracking-down child molesters into useless web filters. By doing so it will increase the suffering of children instead of reducing it, and is therefore a law against children.
I assume you are excluding war zones, and just focussing e.g. on the US. That's fair, but I think in this case you should also consider that hammers are way more often used then guns. I've done a lot of renovation work on my house, and I suspect even if I went hunting every single week from now on, I wouldn't catch up in terms of hammer usage hours to gun usage hours till I die. Hammers are useful and they get used a lot. If you use statistics to estimate whether a particular object is dangerous to handle, then usage is an important consideration.
In this respect, I suspect that a hammer is more dangerous to handle than e.g. a screwdriver, even though it's quite possible to do yourself harm with a screwdriver, too.
I dunno - I've been using KDE for years, recently I gave Kubuntu a try (using it to setup the Christmas gift for my dad), and it came with KDE 4.1. Either there is still so much functionality missing that it's not usable yet, or the usage concepts are so far from my expectations that I couldn't get the hang of it. Looking around on the message boards seemed to indicate the former, so I switched back to KDE 3.5.6.
One thing I found particularly puzzling are the plasmoids - I couldn't see the point. They seem to be basically applications which can not be re-sized, brought in the foreground or moved around. They are not in the task panel either. So why would I use a plasmoid instead of a application window? To see it, I would need to minimize every other window on the desktop.
Then again - it didn't seem possible to add an application to the panel - only plasmoids. So no quick access to the 3-4 apps I need the most.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not knocking it - it had a nice look to it, the eye-candy was neat. (The icons were damn hard to read though.) However I just didn't get the hang of it. At the time I couldn't find a general usage guide either, so I'd be curious for any insight you could provide.
There are two aspects to this: facebook's right to have this rule, and people liking this rule. There is really nothing wrong with complaining about a rule you don't like - even if you don't debate facebook's right to have that rule. In fact - many companies would probably prefer to have people complain about the things they don't like, rather than just leaving. It gives them a chance to understand their customers or users and adjust to do something about it.
No doubt there will be some women which would want to post pictures of themselves breastfeeding, and complain about other nudity at the same time. However I think there'll be plenty of women who have no problem with either type of nudity, too. I'm a parent myself and this "save the children" crowd doesn't speak for me, and not for my wife either. We want our daughter to grow up in a free society, that's very important for us.
I'm confident (but haven't checked) that Maggie appeared in the very first Simpsons episode. Therefore, Maggie was conceived on or before December 17th, 1989, making her at least 19 years old. She happens to portray a 2 year old in the fictional world presented by the show, but she herself is 19.
Sorry, but even if the "Simpson" show had an interest in continuity - there is no relationship between the time it takes to produce a show and the age of the fictional characters. If I were to write a story about a 5 year-old, and take three years to write it, it would still not be a story about an 8-year old. A fictional character doesn't portray anyone - because it's a fictional character, it just doesn't exist.
Except that the Bible says nothing about birth control.
Christian fundamentalists do, however. I can't really comment on whether that's theologically correct or not - I don't have sufficient knowledge or interest there. It is morally wrong though, because of the proven uselessness of teaching "abstinence only" and of the harm and suffering which results. Now I realize that "Christian fundamentalist" is hardly a well-defined term, so to clarify: I know many Christians oppose this policy too, and I applaud them.
I see your point - I wonder about software patents though - is anyone aware of a case where a software patent has advanced software design methodology?
That comes to about 15.51MB, which is not an insignificant chunk of storage.
Sounds old-fashioned to me, to be honest. Allow me to explain, please: Let's assume that storage was provided by a harddrive with a capacity of 500GB - that means we are using about 0.0032% of that drive. Again to be generous let's say the cost of that drive is around $70 - that means to provide the space required for this email, we would need to spend 0.224 cents. That's for having the space though - it's not that the drive becomes unusable or needs to hold this data forever - once the receiver clicks "delete" the space is freed-up again. So we are talking about the temporary use of a resource which is worth less than a cent. I think it's fair and appropriate to call that insignificant in the year 2008.
As for the remainder of the argument, let me please state again: I'm not saying that there can never be a justification for these restrictions, but "resources" does not qualify.
This whole resources angle in respect to computers seems ridiculously outdated. Certainly at some point computers were big expensive machines, RAM was measured in Kilobytes, and computing time had to be applied for. That's in the past, and while computer technology has developed fast - it's really been in the past for a long time now.
Sure there is some cost associated to store incoming emails, just as there is a cost associated with visiting someone's office and wearing down the carpet by standing on it, affecting the air condition by opening the door, or reducing the structural integrity of a desk by placing a piece of paper on top. It's absurd to even consider the fraction of a cent this cost the university, let alone to use that as justification for strange policies and arbitrary restrictions on free speech. To clarify: I'm not saying that there can never be a justification for these restrictions, but "resources" does not qualify.
This article has really nothing to do with computer security. It's not account logins which are on the CDs in question - it's merely account numbers and names. So with this information you can not log into someone's bank account. However you could request direct debit from that person's account into your account. If that person objects later, then the transaction is canceled.
So if you want to use this information to get money you need to setup an account (which creates a significant paper trail - including passport or ID numbers) and make sure you withdraw the money before the bank catches up with you.
One possibility to make money with this is to withdraw only very small amounts, and hope the victim doesn't even bother to check the small charge.
It's doubtful whether Computers can help you learn other subjects. However in today's industry you need to have computer skills. Even low-level jobs require that you understand spreadsheets, word processors etc. So you need computers in school in order to teach kids about computers.
Also it might be interesting to consider using computers to reduce costs. Along the lines of the "one laptop per child" idea - rather than paying for textbooks, it could make sense in the future to pay for the development of text books, which can then be freely distributed and read on computers. The money saved could be used to improve schools, hire more teachers etc. I don't think the current textbook industry business model is the well suited for today's needs.
Well essentially that means borrowing money in order to spend it on foreign-made consumer goods. You're relying on other countries still valuing the dollar, even though it's worth less and less. What would you say if Mozambique was trying to do the same thing? Eventually nobody would want Mozambique money anymore in exchange for their goods.
"One country two systems" has been proposed by China for Taiwan. The Taiwanese - having had de-facto independence for over 50 years - would prefer to stay independent, rather than being someone's colony again. (It's described in the link you gave, btw.)
I don't think they watch much TV or interact with teachers before they are able to speak. If it's at that early of an age, then it's either the parents or it's biological.
Looking at the first two studies (the third link didn't work for me) it seems they are merely stating that there is a cultural component to gender roles. They don't rule out a biological component, nor do they make a statement which component is more significant.
What advantages will your product give the customer, making it easier to sell and possibly making the customers switch?
I think you make very valid points. However there is an advantage good programmers can have, even over a well-established company: They may be able to complete the project. The waste and the insanity of IT companies does not just exist in Dilbert cartoons, it's real.
That's not to say that it's as easy to manage people as it is to complain about management, or that you can run a company without sales people etc. Still there is an opportunity to do better and small, new companies have a chance against a big moloch which is usually bogged down by infighting and incompetence.
Slashdot Mirror
Just because it's legal for someone to demand money (selling free software is certainly allowed in Germany), doesn't mean you have to pay what they demand. A payment demand hidden in a EULA or AGB (Allgemeine Geschäftsbedingungen) does not mean you've entered a legally binding contract when you clicked on "download". That doesn't mean the scammer is violating the law, unfortunately - but neither do you have to pay.
In general the way to deal with these sites is this: do not react on them contacting you - an IP number and data entered into a web form is not enough for them to get their claim accepted by the court. However if you do respond and admit you downloaded from their site, then they have some more ammunition - not enough, but don't give it to them, anyway. For the IP number to be correlated to your address, they need a German judge to issue an order to your IP provider. Of course the judge won't don't that - these scammers have tried to get orders like that many times, and they've always been unsuccessful. Scammers are not very popular, judges usually don't go out of their way to help them.
So don't communicate with the scammers - wait for the court order (gerichtlicher Mahnbescheid), if they bother to go that far. Once you get the order, tell the court you object. That's it, it doesn't go further than that.
On youtube check out katzenjens, he made a few videos on the matter: http://www.katzenjens.de/abzockinfos.html (German language, only). Here is a good one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbZzRJm-3_4&feature=channel
We find bugs by building extensive testbenches (essentially software projects which exercise the design or part of the design), doing formal analysis etc. The verification engineer will normally look at the specification, not at the design-internals. That's done so that he verifies the specification without getting sucked into the design engineers mindset - so he verifies a black box. To be fair: we also use code reviews, but to a limited extent, and it's not a very important tool.
Sometimes parts of the functionality of a chip is certified by an outside organization - that approach is typically used for safety-critical interfaces and things like that. (Our chips are used in automotive applications, so often people's life's depend on the quality of our designs.)
I think the same approach could be used here. This product should be certified - an independent organization should look at it, and through black-box tests determine whether it's reliable or not. Software errors are only one aspect which can fail in such a device anyway - looking at the code you are not going to find out whether a cop with particularly warm hands would affect a sensor (or some other analog component) of the breathalyzer.
Consider how little benefit is created for the actual victims by blocking a single sales channel to some of the child-porn customers. When you actually do something to catch the child molesters, then you could potentially stop abuse. This measure diverts resources from tracking-down child molesters into useless web filters. By doing so it will increase the suffering of children instead of reducing it, and is therefore a law against children.
"Always somewhere" sounds cute, but if it's true then it should be possible to give an example. Which country allows hosting child-porn?
In this respect, I suspect that a hammer is more dangerous to handle than e.g. a screwdriver, even though it's quite possible to do yourself harm with a screwdriver, too.
One thing I found particularly puzzling are the plasmoids - I couldn't see the point. They seem to be basically applications which can not be re-sized, brought in the foreground or moved around. They are not in the task panel either. So why would I use a plasmoid instead of a application window? To see it, I would need to minimize every other window on the desktop.
Then again - it didn't seem possible to add an application to the panel - only plasmoids. So no quick access to the 3-4 apps I need the most.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not knocking it - it had a nice look to it, the eye-candy was neat. (The icons were damn hard to read though.) However I just didn't get the hang of it. At the time I couldn't find a general usage guide either, so I'd be curious for any insight you could provide.
There are two aspects to this: facebook's right to have this rule, and people liking this rule. There is really nothing wrong with complaining about a rule you don't like - even if you don't debate facebook's right to have that rule. In fact - many companies would probably prefer to have people complain about the things they don't like, rather than just leaving. It gives them a chance to understand their customers or users and adjust to do something about it.
No doubt there will be some women which would want to post pictures of themselves breastfeeding, and complain about other nudity at the same time. However I think there'll be plenty of women who have no problem with either type of nudity, too. I'm a parent myself and this "save the children" crowd doesn't speak for me, and not for my wife either. We want our daughter to grow up in a free society, that's very important for us.
I'm confident (but haven't checked) that Maggie appeared in the very first Simpsons episode. Therefore, Maggie was conceived on or before December 17th, 1989, making her at least 19 years old. She happens to portray a 2 year old in the fictional world presented by the show, but she herself is 19.
Sorry, but even if the "Simpson" show had an interest in continuity - there is no relationship between the time it takes to produce a show and the age of the fictional characters. If I were to write a story about a 5 year-old, and take three years to write it, it would still not be a story about an 8-year old. A fictional character doesn't portray anyone - because it's a fictional character, it just doesn't exist.
Christian fundamentalists do, however. I can't really comment on whether that's theologically correct or not - I don't have sufficient knowledge or interest there. It is morally wrong though, because of the proven uselessness of teaching "abstinence only" and of the harm and suffering which results. Now I realize that "Christian fundamentalist" is hardly a well-defined term, so to clarify: I know many Christians oppose this policy too, and I applaud them.
Furthermore - Christian cultures hamper usage of birth control in Africa, too. Rather than preventing ways to decrease infant mortality, I think the ethical way to contribute to population control is to stop religious fundamentalism from interfering with development aid. http://www.plannedparenthood.org/newsroom/press-releases/bush-administration-withholds-africa-22494.htm
I see your point - I wonder about software patents though - is anyone aware of a case where a software patent has advanced software design methodology?
I have: my EeePC suspends and wakes up without any problems (with the original Linux-distribution). It's quick, too.
Sounds old-fashioned to me, to be honest. Allow me to explain, please: Let's assume that storage was provided by a harddrive with a capacity of 500GB - that means we are using about 0.0032% of that drive. Again to be generous let's say the cost of that drive is around $70 - that means to provide the space required for this email, we would need to spend 0.224 cents. That's for having the space though - it's not that the drive becomes unusable or needs to hold this data forever - once the receiver clicks "delete" the space is freed-up again. So we are talking about the temporary use of a resource which is worth less than a cent. I think it's fair and appropriate to call that insignificant in the year 2008.
As for the remainder of the argument, let me please state again: I'm not saying that there can never be a justification for these restrictions, but "resources" does not qualify.
Sure there is some cost associated to store incoming emails, just as there is a cost associated with visiting someone's office and wearing down the carpet by standing on it, affecting the air condition by opening the door, or reducing the structural integrity of a desk by placing a piece of paper on top. It's absurd to even consider the fraction of a cent this cost the university, let alone to use that as justification for strange policies and arbitrary restrictions on free speech. To clarify: I'm not saying that there can never be a justification for these restrictions, but "resources" does not qualify.
So if you want to use this information to get money you need to setup an account (which creates a significant paper trail - including passport or ID numbers) and make sure you withdraw the money before the bank catches up with you.
One possibility to make money with this is to withdraw only very small amounts, and hope the victim doesn't even bother to check the small charge.
Also it might be interesting to consider using computers to reduce costs. Along the lines of the "one laptop per child" idea - rather than paying for textbooks, it could make sense in the future to pay for the development of text books, which can then be freely distributed and read on computers. The money saved could be used to improve schools, hire more teachers etc. I don't think the current textbook industry business model is the well suited for today's needs.
Well essentially that means borrowing money in order to spend it on foreign-made consumer goods. You're relying on other countries still valuing the dollar, even though it's worth less and less. What would you say if Mozambique was trying to do the same thing? Eventually nobody would want Mozambique money anymore in exchange for their goods.
"One country two systems" has been proposed by China for Taiwan. The Taiwanese - having had de-facto independence for over 50 years - would prefer to stay independent, rather than being someone's colony again. (It's described in the link you gave, btw.)
I don't think they watch much TV or interact with teachers before they are able to speak. If it's at that early of an age, then it's either the parents or it's biological.
Looking at the first two studies (the third link didn't work for me) it seems they are merely stating that there is a cultural component to gender roles. They don't rule out a biological component, nor do they make a statement which component is more significant.
I think you make very valid points. However there is an advantage good programmers can have, even over a well-established company: They may be able to complete the project. The waste and the insanity of IT companies does not just exist in Dilbert cartoons, it's real.
That's not to say that it's as easy to manage people as it is to complain about management, or that you can run a company without sales people etc. Still there is an opportunity to do better and small, new companies have a chance against a big moloch which is usually bogged down by infighting and incompetence.
It should be possible to configure the phone that it prefers another network, though. I'm pretty sure my old Siemens ME45 can do that.
Sure there is:
What you are talking about here happened 66 years ago. Anyone involved is either retired or dead. This is really no longer valid criticism.