They prefer convenience to challenge. For now, it's more convenient for them to pick on Internet Explorer.
It's not really a question of convenience, it's that Internet Explorer is on a majority of Windows systems. If you're a criminal trying to exploit a browser vulnerability, wouldn't you pick the most-used browser? It's a better return on investment.
I seem to recall that OS9 was being used in many post-offices as an embedded OS on some of their equipment. Dunno if it's true today, but it was always a decent operating system, lean and fast.
"And since the Court describes Pavlovich's activities as "illegal", it appears to have already decided the main issue of the case itself (which has not yet been tried)."
This is GOOD. In the appeal, attorneys can show that the judge was biased. Shouldn't be hard, given his ignorant comments.
In 1988, some college friends and I found that Orson Scott Card was listed in the Greensboro phonebook. That naturally resulted in a road trip, and two of us drove all night to go say hi. Mrs. Card asked us to come back around noon, since her husband was down with the flu. Although he wasn't feeling well, Mr. Card--I can't bring myself to call him Scott--was incredibly kind to us.
I admit, we hadn't really thought things through. We were in college. I guess we expected to drop by, say hi, and leave. But Mr. Card was fantastic. He invited us into his home, and offered us food and drink. He even offered to let us crash on his couch, since both of us were exhausted. He showed us his PC with WordPerfect 5.1 just installed, "where the magic happens." It was really kinda anticlimatic. There were piles of publisher books just inside the living room of his townhouse, and he gave us a few bags' full, even helping us carry them out to my car.
All of this is relatively prosaic, but what struck us most was the sheer niceness of the guy. He and his family were just so NORMAL. He was actually quite flattered that we'd taken an interest in him; he said normally people weren't really all that excited to meet him personally, but they just liked to read his books. (I understand he was unlisted after that, though!) He was one of the most genuine, sincere people I've ever met.
I really haven't read much of Card's in the past ten years, but I'll never forget that day. Whatever other people write about him, whatever his involvement with the Mormon Church, Orson Scott Card is a good guy, maybe even with capital G's. He's a treasure.
Over twenty years ago, a group of persons successfully stormed Sealand. Since Sealand claims its own sovereignty, it is not protected by any other governments--and perhaps most importantly, its status has not been laid down by the UN, so the existing "government" of Sealand may have no recourse in the event of a successful takeover. Sealand is responsible for its own protection. First question, then: What's to prevent people from storming the tower once more? Second question: Why would a large company feel comfortable storing its data on Sealand, if it knows that its competitors could use mercenaries with no legal recourse? Unless convinced otherwise, I don't feel comfortable storing my data on a sixty-year-old artificial structure in the North Sea, where a storm, explosives, simple metal fatigue, or a thousand other things could disrupt data access. You guys are sitting ducks.
Slashdot Mirror
They prefer convenience to challenge. For now, it's more convenient for them to pick on Internet Explorer.
It's not really a question of convenience, it's that Internet Explorer is on a majority of Windows systems. If you're a criminal trying to exploit a browser vulnerability, wouldn't you pick the most-used browser? It's a better return on investment.
I seem to recall that OS9 was being used in many post-offices as an embedded OS on some of their equipment. Dunno if it's true today, but it was always a decent operating system, lean and fast.
"And since the Court describes Pavlovich's activities as "illegal", it appears to have already decided the main issue of the case itself (which has not yet been tried)."
This is GOOD. In the appeal, attorneys can show that the judge was biased. Shouldn't be hard, given his ignorant comments.
--Fred
In 1988, some college friends and I found that Orson Scott Card was listed in the Greensboro phonebook. That naturally resulted in a road trip, and two of us drove all night to go say hi. Mrs. Card asked us to come back around noon, since her husband was down with the flu. Although he wasn't feeling well, Mr. Card--I can't bring myself to call him Scott--was incredibly kind to us.
I admit, we hadn't really thought things through. We were in college. I guess we expected to drop by, say hi, and leave. But Mr. Card was fantastic. He invited us into his home, and offered us food and drink. He even offered to let us crash on his couch, since both of us were exhausted. He showed us his PC with WordPerfect 5.1 just installed, "where the magic happens." It was really kinda anticlimatic. There were piles of publisher books just inside the living room of his townhouse, and he gave us a few bags' full, even helping us carry them out to my car.
All of this is relatively prosaic, but what struck us most was the sheer niceness of the guy. He and his family were just so NORMAL. He was actually quite flattered that we'd taken an interest in him; he said normally people weren't really all that excited to meet him personally, but they just liked to read his books. (I understand he was unlisted after that, though!) He was one of the most genuine, sincere people I've ever met.
I really haven't read much of Card's in the past ten years, but I'll never forget that day. Whatever other people write about him, whatever his involvement with the Mormon Church, Orson Scott Card is a good guy, maybe even with capital G's. He's a treasure.
Later,
--Fred
Over twenty years ago, a group of persons successfully stormed Sealand. Since Sealand claims its own sovereignty, it is not protected by any other governments--and perhaps most importantly, its status has not been laid down by the UN, so the existing "government" of Sealand may have no recourse in the event of a successful takeover. Sealand is responsible for its own protection. First question, then: What's to prevent people from storming the tower once more? Second question: Why would a large company feel comfortable storing its data on Sealand, if it knows that its competitors could use mercenaries with no legal recourse? Unless convinced otherwise, I don't feel comfortable storing my data on a sixty-year-old artificial structure in the North Sea, where a storm, explosives, simple metal fatigue, or a thousand other things could disrupt data access. You guys are sitting ducks.