As a former soldier myself, I'd love to see the auto-sleep function. Maximize your sleeping time when you'd otherwise waste too much time going to sleep and waking up.
It apparently was a form on the web site, click to generate a pre-written email. For reference, this union has over half a million members, each of which as asked to click and click again.
In the end, they stated their intent of disruption and didn't stop when told it was overloading systems. They're just as guilty as a DDOS or mass spammer.
Your own quote shows the Dems and Pubs didn't have the spine or will to make real changes that would lead to financial solvency. They didn't even come close to the tea party position of demanding financial solvency.
The sensationalist media portrayed the Foxconn employee suicides as a reaction to harsh working conditions. That's a lot of suicides! But a lot of people work at Foxconn. Did you know the suicide rate there is less for that demographic than in the general Chinese society, and much less than for China overall?
It's an extension of PCI Express plus DisplayPort over cable. The protocol you run over Thunderbolt may have its own real-world slowdowns, but it's 20 Gb/sec bidirectional as far as I know.
It was extortion. Give in to our demands or disruption of your business will continue. RICO time, union officials in PMITA prison, if we didn't have a DoJ in the pockets of the unions.
No. They don't. They fired a worker for malfeasance, next thing they know they're getting DDOSed by phone and email.
Sorry for you if see reality as biased. You didn't dare to refute any part of my statement. These days the unions are well-coordinated and well-funded. Most target companies aren't.
Did you know the SEIU once flooded an emergency room with fake patients who weren't sick in order to force a hospital to unionize? The SEIU's abuses, not of just companies but of workers, in particular are well-documented.
This was a non-representative union. It doesn't represent any employees of the target company.
Tha'ts a problem these days. A small company doesn't just fight with its union that it has a contract with. If any dispute happens, powerful unions from across the country will come down on them with a huge bankroll. They pay for high-power lawyers, robocall centers, mass emailers and (I love this part) non-union picketers.
They basically have a huge expensive package they can open up at a moment's notice on any company that pisses them off. It's enough to bury most small companies, extort them into complying because they can't afford to respond. This company is big enough to fight.
They even have a package they can enact if a company refuses to immediately cave into all demands for unionization. They move to prevent a worker vote until they've had time to pressure the workers, including threats and harrassment, and sneak enough ringers into the company. Meanwhile, they wage an all-out public relations campaign against the company trying to bankrupt them through lost business and legal fees.
This is an SEIU trademark, even for a company that in the very beginning says "Okay, let's let the workers vote, and we'll gladly accept a union if they want it." They SEIU doesn't like that they'd lose that vote if the workers are currently well-paid and happy, so they try to engineer a situation where they will win.
Not a bot, but they had their own mail server mass-spamming the company.
All they need is for their server to be more powerful than the company's to create a denial of service that would require efforts to mitigate, just as is required for large scale DDOS bot attacks, but on a smaller scale.
USB 2: 480 Mb/sec theoretical, real world half that
USB 3: 5 Gb/sec theoretical, real world about 3.2 Gb/sec
DVI: 4 Gb/sec single link, need dual-link for more than 1900x1200 resolution
DisplayPort: 1.6 to 5.4 Gb/sec per lane, four lanes, for 17.3 Gb/sec max, real world is 80% of that (enough for four 1080p60 displays), plus a 1 Mb/sec auxiliary channel.
Thunderbolt: 20 Gb/sec bi-directional, can carry the four lanes of DisplayPort data with room to spare.
So you have less bandwidth than a single-link DVI and far less than the modern competition. Your monitors had better be low-res, even for USB 3.
Not content with its NLRB charge, LIUNA also began using an allegedly illegal strategy: it bombarded Pulte's sales offices and three of its executives with thousands of phone calls and e-mails. To generate a high volume of calls, LIUNA both hired an auto-dialing service and requested its members to call Pulte. It also encouraged its members, through postings on its website, to âoefight backâ by using LIUNAâ(TM)s server to send e-mails to specific Pulte executives. Most of the calls and e-mails concerned Pulte's purported unfair labor practices, though some communications included threats and obscene language.
This was in-part an automated denial of service. But, okay, give them the benefit of the doubt. They didn't know their campaign was materially inhibiting the company's ability to conduct business, and the law requires they intentionally do so. The union also categorized this campaign as "fighting back." Even though the court didn't, I'd again give them the benefit of the doubt as that being generic rhetoric. But then there's this:
Four days after LIUNA started its phone and e-mail blitz, Pulteâ(TM)s general counsel contacted LIUNA. He requested, among other things, that LIUNA stop the attack because it prevented Pulteâ(TM)s employees from doing their jobs. When the calls and emails continued, Pulte filed this suit alleging several state-law torts and violations of the Federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act
An organization without such intent would have ceased upon learning of the disruption. But they kept it up. The intent to deprive the company of the use of its systems was obviously there.
However, the opinion rejects the claim that the campaign constituted unauthorized access.
All it does is make or remove exceptions, or change definitions, in copyright law.
Generally, the doctrine of first sale says once that copy is sold, the copyright holder can't tell you what to do with it. You can rent it, loan it or resell it. But they have this concept that you didn't buy that copy, you bought a license, and the license says you can't rent.
The government can go one of two ways: It can respect the intended limitations on copyright and tell the copyright holders that they don't have the power to limit rentals under First Sale, that copyright doesn't give them that power under a EULA. In this case, anybody can rent out any title under First Sale. Don't we wish Congress wasn't the slave to industry?
Or the government can say rentals aren't allowed under First Sale. In that case, people who want to rent out would need an individual deal with the copyright holder, or for that copyright holder to explicity allow rentals in the EULA. That is what the 1990 software rental act did.
Interestingly, console or handheld video games were NOT part of this exception. This is probably because at the time they were cartridge-based, and therefore not as easy to copy.
Unlikely, but a federal judge is not someone you want mad at you because of legal shenanigans.
You should see the decision from the Canadian judge about Cisco's conduct and the complicity of the US government. Royally pissed off may adequately describe it.
When we have the greatest skewed wealth distribution the history of HUMANITY
No, we don't. Switzerland currently has a higher Gini index in terms of wealth, and several countries have a higher index in terms of income.
You also mentioned history. Ancient Rome had a much more skewed distribution, as did British India and 17th Century Holland.
But note that this is relative. Richer societies tend to have the most skewed wealth and income distributions. A higher index does not necessarily mean a higher quality of life. For example, Bangladesh has a much more equal wealth distribution than we do, but that's because almost everybody is dirt poor, they have almost no wealth among themselves to be unequally distributed.
Not just saving wealth or shipping it over seas - not trickle down madness - but actually making a US of A job
How do you define Jobs? Paul Allen has his money in Microsoft stock, where much of the employment is going overseas. But he owns the Sehawks, employeeing a lot of Americans. He has a full-time crew of 60 on his mega yacht, probably all American, do those count? But they're more like personal staff. And then there's his investments -- his $30 million paid American workers at Scaled Composites to make the world's first private manned spacecraft.
It's almost a pity that we've not had high-profile experiments with Rands brand of extremism, but I'm convinced that if we did, they'd have been equally disastrous
An absolutely pure free market wouldn't be very good, but I don't think the death toll would be as high. Communism sees the state as supreme, the sacrifice of millions is negligble. Rand sees the individual's rights as of the highest importance. You couldn't violate that by collectivization, work camps, etc. But you would have a LOT of people who don't care to or aren't able to work starving.
I wonder what Rand would've written if she'd grown up in Sweden. Would she still be as convinced of the evils of government and taxation
It wasn't so much taxation, but the class warfare that she experienced. Her parents were small business owners, declared the "bad guys" by the government because they dared build capital, forced to flee into near starvation. She was then almost kicked out of school because of her parents' class.
That is also my current problem with the debate. The rich already pay more than the poor, almost all taxes paid, which is as it should be. But we have here people who say that's not enough, tax them more, and more, and more! Punish them for becoming rich! They are becoming the "moochers" in Atlas Shrugged.
Unfortunately, in the end, he was no different than any social engineer who uses his or her skills to gain access by acquiring a legitimate set of login credentials by asking for it.
A social engineer has an element of deception. He flat-out asked for it.
If Cisco did that they would be in a world of trouble when it was found out. Courts don't take lightly destroying evidence or committing perjury
That's not all far-fetched given Cisco's abuse of the legal system in this fiasco. I'm betting Cisco had to swear to many of the outright lies used to try to have him held and extradited.
"kochsucker" gave you away. Poor wittle Soros fan doesn't like the competition?
Of course everybody owes to their society. Those who could be considered successes, living well with a good expendable income, already pay almost all income, capital gains and estate taxes in this country.
I'd call that giving back.
You seem to want more. How much is enough for you? 50%? 100%? Shall we just arrest them as counterrevolutionary bourgeosie and confiscate all of their wealth?
There is NOBODY who is wealthy and well fed that doesn't owe his society directly and completely for the privilege
Those being well-fed due to food stamps and other assistance directly owe those who are paying for it. That would be the wealthy. I never hear thanks, only more bitching.
He probably thought that a Cisco employee letting him in gave him some protection. It's not like he hacked or was even dishonest, basically asking a Cisco employee up front "can I use your account to see what I can get?" You don't do that if you have illegal purposes.
Sounds like he was playing private detective to discover what access engineers had, probably worried Cisco would switch around permissions if the info were asked for in the suit. Given that he would have had this type of access as a Cisco employee, I'm betting that he was checking to see if such access still existed for engineers, probably in response to Cisco saying engineers didn't have that kind of access.
"Here we have a man who has no criminal record, who made every possible effort to comply with US immigration laws and procedures, but who dared to take on a multinational giant, rewarded with criminal charges that have been so grotesquely inflated as to make the average well-informed member of the public blanche at the audacity of it all"
It is the antitrust suit he had going against Cisco. Cisco had locked out any other company that might want to provide maintenance for Cisco products, and that was the business his company was in, so he sued. He had been gathering evidence to use in the case against Cisco, and of course Cisco didn't want that.
Slashdot Mirror
As a former soldier myself, I'd love to see the auto-sleep function. Maximize your sleeping time when you'd otherwise waste too much time going to sleep and waking up.
The power armor of mobile infantry.
Getting whacked in the head with a 30-pound salmon might just kill you.
It apparently was a form on the web site, click to generate a pre-written email. For reference, this union has over half a million members, each of which as asked to click and click again.
In the end, they stated their intent of disruption and didn't stop when told it was overloading systems. They're just as guilty as a DDOS or mass spammer.
Your own quote shows the Dems and Pubs didn't have the spine or will to make real changes that would lead to financial solvency. They didn't even come close to the tea party position of demanding financial solvency.
The sensationalist media portrayed the Foxconn employee suicides as a reaction to harsh working conditions. That's a lot of suicides! But a lot of people work at Foxconn. Did you know the suicide rate there is less for that demographic than in the general Chinese society, and much less than for China overall?
It's an extension of PCI Express plus DisplayPort over cable. The protocol you run over Thunderbolt may have its own real-world slowdowns, but it's 20 Gb/sec bidirectional as far as I know.
They gained us those things.
Now most are out for their own power. The days of unions approaching a company with an honest effort to help the employees are waning.
It's not an isolated bad action. It's standard operating procedure.
It was extortion. Give in to our demands or disruption of your business will continue. RICO time, union officials in PMITA prison, if we didn't have a DoJ in the pockets of the unions.
Do you pay to recycle it? Does the government come around and pick them up for recycling?
No. They don't. They fired a worker for malfeasance, next thing they know they're getting DDOSed by phone and email.
Sorry for you if see reality as biased. You didn't dare to refute any part of my statement. These days the unions are well-coordinated and well-funded. Most target companies aren't.
Did you know the SEIU once flooded an emergency room with fake patients who weren't sick in order to force a hospital to unionize? The SEIU's abuses, not of just companies but of workers, in particular are well-documented.
This was a non-representative union. It doesn't represent any employees of the target company.
Tha'ts a problem these days. A small company doesn't just fight with its union that it has a contract with. If any dispute happens, powerful unions from across the country will come down on them with a huge bankroll. They pay for high-power lawyers, robocall centers, mass emailers and (I love this part) non-union picketers.
They basically have a huge expensive package they can open up at a moment's notice on any company that pisses them off. It's enough to bury most small companies, extort them into complying because they can't afford to respond. This company is big enough to fight.
They even have a package they can enact if a company refuses to immediately cave into all demands for unionization. They move to prevent a worker vote until they've had time to pressure the workers, including threats and harrassment, and sneak enough ringers into the company. Meanwhile, they wage an all-out public relations campaign against the company trying to bankrupt them through lost business and legal fees.
This is an SEIU trademark, even for a company that in the very beginning says "Okay, let's let the workers vote, and we'll gladly accept a union if they want it." They SEIU doesn't like that they'd lose that vote if the workers are currently well-paid and happy, so they try to engineer a situation where they will win.
Not a bot, but they had their own mail server mass-spamming the company.
All they need is for their server to be more powerful than the company's to create a denial of service that would require efforts to mitigate, just as is required for large scale DDOS bot attacks, but on a smaller scale.
USB 2: 480 Mb/sec theoretical, real world half that
USB 3: 5 Gb/sec theoretical, real world about 3.2 Gb/sec
DVI: 4 Gb/sec single link, need dual-link for more than 1900x1200 resolution
DisplayPort: 1.6 to 5.4 Gb/sec per lane, four lanes, for 17.3 Gb/sec max, real world is 80% of that (enough for four 1080p60 displays), plus a 1 Mb/sec auxiliary channel.
Thunderbolt: 20 Gb/sec bi-directional, can carry the four lanes of DisplayPort data with room to spare.
So you have less bandwidth than a single-link DVI and far less than the modern competition. Your monitors had better be low-res, even for USB 3.
From the opinion:
This was in-part an automated denial of service. But, okay, give them the benefit of the doubt. They didn't know their campaign was materially inhibiting the company's ability to conduct business, and the law requires they intentionally do so. The union also categorized this campaign as "fighting back." Even though the court didn't, I'd again give them the benefit of the doubt as that being generic rhetoric. But then there's this:
An organization without such intent would have ceased upon learning of the disruption. But they kept it up. The intent to deprive the company of the use of its systems was obviously there.
However, the opinion rejects the claim that the campaign constituted unauthorized access.
All it does is make or remove exceptions, or change definitions, in copyright law.
Generally, the doctrine of first sale says once that copy is sold, the copyright holder can't tell you what to do with it. You can rent it, loan it or resell it. But they have this concept that you didn't buy that copy, you bought a license, and the license says you can't rent.
The government can go one of two ways: It can respect the intended limitations on copyright and tell the copyright holders that they don't have the power to limit rentals under First Sale, that copyright doesn't give them that power under a EULA. In this case, anybody can rent out any title under First Sale. Don't we wish Congress wasn't the slave to industry?
Or the government can say rentals aren't allowed under First Sale. In that case, people who want to rent out would need an individual deal with the copyright holder, or for that copyright holder to explicity allow rentals in the EULA. That is what the 1990 software rental act did.
Interestingly, console or handheld video games were NOT part of this exception. This is probably because at the time they were cartridge-based, and therefore not as easy to copy.
You should see the decision from the Canadian judge about Cisco's conduct and the complicity of the US government. Royally pissed off may adequately describe it.
No, we don't. Switzerland currently has a higher Gini index in terms of wealth, and several countries have a higher index in terms of income.
You also mentioned history. Ancient Rome had a much more skewed distribution, as did British India and 17th Century Holland.
But note that this is relative. Richer societies tend to have the most skewed wealth and income distributions. A higher index does not necessarily mean a higher quality of life. For example, Bangladesh has a much more equal wealth distribution than we do, but that's because almost everybody is dirt poor, they have almost no wealth among themselves to be unequally distributed.
How do you define Jobs? Paul Allen has his money in Microsoft stock, where much of the employment is going overseas. But he owns the Sehawks, employeeing a lot of Americans. He has a full-time crew of 60 on his mega yacht, probably all American, do those count? But they're more like personal staff. And then there's his investments -- his $30 million paid American workers at Scaled Composites to make the world's first private manned spacecraft.
An absolutely pure free market wouldn't be very good, but I don't think the death toll would be as high. Communism sees the state as supreme, the sacrifice of millions is negligble. Rand sees the individual's rights as of the highest importance. You couldn't violate that by collectivization, work camps, etc. But you would have a LOT of people who don't care to or aren't able to work starving.
It wasn't so much taxation, but the class warfare that she experienced. Her parents were small business owners, declared the "bad guys" by the government because they dared build capital, forced to flee into near starvation. She was then almost kicked out of school because of her parents' class.
That is also my current problem with the debate. The rich already pay more than the poor, almost all taxes paid, which is as it should be. But we have here people who say that's not enough, tax them more, and more, and more! Punish them for becoming rich! They are becoming the "moochers" in Atlas Shrugged.
she was just a vile, hypocritical person. I don't see how people can hold her in such general high esteem.
A social engineer has an element of deception. He flat-out asked for it.
That's not all far-fetched given Cisco's abuse of the legal system in this fiasco. I'm betting Cisco had to swear to many of the outright lies used to try to have him held and extradited.
"kochsucker" gave you away. Poor wittle Soros fan doesn't like the competition?
Of course everybody owes to their society. Those who could be considered successes, living well with a good expendable income, already pay almost all income, capital gains and estate taxes in this country.
I'd call that giving back.
You seem to want more. How much is enough for you? 50%? 100%? Shall we just arrest them as counterrevolutionary bourgeosie and confiscate all of their wealth?
Those being well-fed due to food stamps and other assistance directly owe those who are paying for it. That would be the wealthy. I never hear thanks, only more bitching.
He probably thought that a Cisco employee letting him in gave him some protection. It's not like he hacked or was even dishonest, basically asking a Cisco employee up front "can I use your account to see what I can get?" You don't do that if you have illegal purposes.
Sounds like he was playing private detective to discover what access engineers had, probably worried Cisco would switch around permissions if the info were asked for in the suit. Given that he would have had this type of access as a Cisco employee, I'm betting that he was checking to see if such access still existed for engineers, probably in response to Cisco saying engineers didn't have that kind of access.
After reviewing all of the facts of the case:
"Here we have a man who has no criminal record, who made every possible effort to comply with US immigration laws and procedures, but who dared to take on a multinational giant, rewarded with criminal charges that have been so grotesquely inflated as to make the average well-informed member of the public blanche at the audacity of it all"
It is the antitrust suit he had going against Cisco. Cisco had locked out any other company that might want to provide maintenance for Cisco products, and that was the business his company was in, so he sued. He had been gathering evidence to use in the case against Cisco, and of course Cisco didn't want that.