If you feel that strongly then perhaps you should be asking yourself if you want to remain employed by a company at such odds with your own ethics. By suggesting this process your boss has indicated that they support software patents. As others have said your contract likely says the code you write for them is owned by the company. So ask yourself do you support code you write being subject to patent filing?
If the answer is no then you may not need to worry about being sacked - you should perhaps be looking for other employment.
I am not a DNS expert so feel free to correct me if I am jumping to any wrong conclusions here..
It seems to me that the problem (as TFA discusses it) revolves around the use of third parties to tell your browser whether to accept the certificate in terms of authenticity.
If the concern of browsers is to ensure the server providing the certificate is the real one, why are they/we not using something like the SSHFP or CERT DNS record types. If my reading of those two is correct the system could work thus:
- user requests www.foo.com - browser is presented with a certificate by the www.foo.com server - certificate cannot be validated by signing authorities so - browser validates this against the DNS/CERT and/or DNS SSHFP entries
If by this point the browser still cannot verify the authenticity of the server providing the certificate it can throw up a warning to the user. Okay so a MITM attack could provide false DNS records for particular/any domains but they could the same now and redirect a cert lookup to their own spoofed "certification authorities".
Isn't this "story" just rehashing the news about the MOU signed last week (see first link in TFS)? Ah yes but this is/. isn't it.
As for the 54% of 14 year olds (although their sample size was tiny IYAM) who share files. We can't be sure what they were using the P2P for as we're only given quotes from the press release by a very interested party. Okay they were probably downloading some music in breach of copyright but even if they continue, the MOU agreement means the worst they'll get is a letter to their parents.
It is fascinating to see how far behind other areas of the world are. No electricity, no plumbing. No clean water, no food, no homes - but they get nice jobs in sweat shops making our clothing though. Not sure they'd call it fascinating.
You have to wonder -- by the time the rest of the world catches up to where we are today, where will we be? Probably moaning about the lack of features in some other gadget and net neutrality:o)
Is there an example of an open source driver that doesn't suck? Kernel driver? I'm sure there is but I'm not always sure which ones have been written by the manufacturer. Fro non-kernel drivers HPLIP is a pretty good example of a company opening up it's driver base properly and with some success http://hplip.sourceforge.net/. I still wish they'd notify of Linux support on the boxes though.
> But hey, I'd love to be proven wrong since it's one of my favorite sci-fi movies, but somehow I'm skeptical.
Well you're proven wrong on one part anyway. I can find no mention of Cleese playing Gort anywhere except in the TFS above. From the SFFMedia article it links to...
"IGN reports that Cleese will play a physicist Dr. Barnhardt, a Nobel Prize laureate who helps work out why Klaatu and Gort have come to earth."
I know this is/. but when the submitter hasn't read TFA we're off to a bad start!
Stealing songs is already a crime: if you walk into a store, take a heap of CDs, and walk out with them without paying, you can be arrested.
You seem to be making the same point as the GP. After all they did write "stealing songs" (e.g. in quotes) so I think they had realised the point you are making. In any case what you describe is stealing *CDs*, not stealing *songs*:o).
if you walk into a store, copy the heap of CDs, and walk out with the copies without paying, you can't be arrested.
Not for the act of copying the CDs but possibly for breaking the seals and opening them the store might try to get you for criminal damage. Not saying they'd succeed but...
It's to do with one being theft, and the other not being theft, because they're completely different things.
Actually it's to do with one being a *crime* and one not. IANAL etc. but copyright infringement is not a crime (in the UK anyway) unless it's done in the course of a business. So if you were coying those CDs to sell in your own shop, it's a crime. The whole area is grey and murky - just the kind of environment lawyers thrive in.
A PIN (a 4-digit number with a search space of 10 000) is much, much less secure than a signature (complex hand gesture with near-infinite search space).
Whilst the PIN is the weak point in the system (or to be more exact the human is), one would imagine the chip is more secure than the magnetic strip. Taking the example posted elsewhere on here, a card with a chip is less susceptible to a skimming reader which sits on top of the card slot. This being because the chip is not read as it passes through but once it reaches it's destination. If that is interrupted the transaction fails - unlike with a skimmer.
That said the PIN is undoubtedly the weak point. I have often stood in a queue at the supermarket and from fifteen feet away clearly seen the PIN someone is entering. In fact I once observed this with someone I knew and caught them up in the street and told them their PIN number just to demonstrate how easy it is. People are also just too casual with the cards. I always try to insert the card into the reader myself, never give it to the sales assistant and refuse to allow them to insert it into their till while I punch the number into the card reader. I tend to frustrate the assistant who try to press the Enter button to accept the price before handing it to me to enter the pin. The reason for that part is so I can tell if they are charging me what they just said they would!
The whole point of C&P is that the card side of the transaction should not involve the retailer other than knowing if the transaction was successful.
That's assuming the ads use an IFrame or similar on the site you are visiting. If they use scripting isn't just as likely the ads will appear to come from the host site rather than Phorm?
Not that it will make much difference, AdBlock+ does a great job for me.
If the shops near me starting playing *any* kind of music "kinda loud". They would have a much bigger issue than "gangs" of young people outside their door.
the biggest issues in my area (a new town town miles for the nearest city) is that there is nothing for the teens to do... nothing.
I live on an estate in the middle of an affluent area just on the border of Greater London and I can confirm that this issue is not unique to new towns miles from a city. We have exactly the same issue and indeed my estate was sadly host to one of the fatal stabbings just before Christmas.
The problem is no one wants to try to sort this out, because it involves spending money, proper policing, better scools, better parenting, and it will take time. Why do all that when you can attach a noise maker to a building, and shift the problem elsewhere.
This hits the nail on the head. Current policies for "dealing" with the bored youth are to move them on. Because we are close to the Met Police boundary we have a problem in that our Police will move young people on and they just go down the round into the Met area until they are moved on - at which time they come back. Nobody is addressing the issue - everybody is moving it away from their desk.
Lats night - on the way to pick up a take-away - I walked past a "gang" of youth. Eight lads sitting by some shops. My route was blocked so I just said "excuse me" and - what do you know - they moved. One asked me the time etc etc. Totally frightening - not!
With regards the Mosquito itself: The most entertaining remedy I saw was to get ten of fifteen 30-40 tr olds to dress up in hoodies and other "youth" wear and hang around outside the shops with the Mosquitos.
It should be pointed out that some excellentbooks published by Tor have been available as DRM and cost free downloads ( in a variety of formats) for some time.
Well I guess the patent[1] covers people like Barracuda distributing a single product with SMTP and anti-virus built in not people like us who install an MTA and a virus scanner onto a server and get them to work together.
[1] Just want to point out that I deplore software patents and I am not defending them here. I am just saying that the "remove the code" argument doesn't work in this case as it means Barracuda lose their product.
Putting content scanning on an email server is pretty damned obvious.
But the patent wouldn't cover you or I[1] getting a fresh server, installing an MTA, installing a virus scanner and then integrating the two. The patent covers you or I distributing a product which includes those two things as a single service. Software patents are plain wrong but it's not because an individual claim happens to be obvious, it's because the concept of patents is flawed when applied to software.
[1]Actually it doesn't cover me - I live in the UK:o)
That won't work in this case. The patent is for "A system for detecting and eliminating viruses on a computer network includes a File Transfer Protocol (FTP) proxy server, for controlling the transfer of files and a Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (SMTP) proxy server for controlling the transfer of mail messages through the system." So for Barracuda to comply they must stop scanning e-mails for viruses in their products.
This also means that it is not the use of ClamAV per-se which is being challenged but the fact that Barracuda are providing a server which scans for e-mail viruses. No wonder they are going to fight this - it's yer basic "pay up or close down" threat.
Not that I would mind too much - Barracuda's kit has caused me no end of pain in the last year and I don't even use one!
From a scientific perspective, doing the wrong thing thousands of times in a row can pay off if you eventually succeed
But surely you are learning from the "mistake" of doing the wrong thing 999 times before. Well you are if you note what you did and try not to repeat it.
Slashdot Mirror
look guys...ms will cave and remove this if advertisers pay them enough.
There - fixed that for you.
Nope a The Jam reference - sort of - From Going Underground.
"With Kidney machines replaced by rockets and guns
and the public gets what the public wants.."
just so the City can continue to gamble peoples pensions and walk home rich whatever happens.
City gamblers walk home. When did that last happen? Most of the ones I see are asleep on the last train or pouring themselves into cabs.
PS: shouldn't robots on a battlefield all have arms, to move crap out of the way..etc?
Nope - they have rockets and guns (no doubt made out of kidney machines) to blast crap out of the way.
If you feel that strongly then perhaps you should be asking yourself if you want to remain employed by a company at such odds with your own ethics. By suggesting this process your boss has indicated that they support software patents. As others have said your contract likely says the code you write for them is owned by the company. So ask yourself do you support code you write being subject to patent filing?
If the answer is no then you may not need to worry about being sacked - you should perhaps be looking for other employment.
I am not a DNS expert so feel free to correct me if I am jumping to any wrong conclusions here..
It seems to me that the problem (as TFA discusses it) revolves around the use of third parties to tell your browser whether to accept the certificate in terms of authenticity.
If the concern of browsers is to ensure the server providing the certificate is the real one, why are they/we not using something like the SSHFP or CERT DNS record types. If my reading of those two is correct the system could work thus:
- user requests www.foo.com
- browser is presented with a certificate by the www.foo.com server
- certificate cannot be validated by signing authorities so
- browser validates this against the DNS/CERT and/or DNS SSHFP entries
If by this point the browser still cannot verify the authenticity of the server providing the certificate it can throw up a warning to the user. Okay so a MITM attack could provide false DNS records for particular/any domains but they could the same now and redirect a cert lookup to their own spoofed "certification authorities".
Isn't this "story" just rehashing the news about the MOU signed last week (see first link in TFS)? /. isn't it.
Ah yes but this is
As for the 54% of 14 year olds (although their sample size was tiny IYAM) who share files. We can't be sure what they were using the P2P for as we're only given quotes from the press release by a very interested party. Okay they were probably downloading some music in breach of copyright but even if they continue, the MOU agreement means the worst they'll get is a letter to their parents.
Like that's gonna stop 'em!
But surely we know the reason behind the bees disappearing? They're all trying to go to their home planet because of Davros.
On my feed reader this story is shown as "Japanese Scientist's Develop Long-Life.." which sounded much more interesting.
In the UK - if you "loose a suit" - your trousers fall down and you are unlikely to make too much money.
There's a theory that people can read words correctly just as long as the first and last letters are correct.
On that basis.. anybody else read the headline as "Scouts To Hear Small ISPs' Case Against AT&T"?
Fro non-kernel drivers HPLIP is a pretty good example of a company opening up it's driver base properly and with some success http://hplip.sourceforge.net/. I still wish they'd notify of Linux support on the boxes though.
> The new Gort - John Cleese!
/. but when the submitter hasn't read TFA we're off to a bad start!
and..
> But hey, I'd love to be proven wrong since it's one of my favorite sci-fi movies, but somehow I'm skeptical.
Well you're proven wrong on one part anyway. I can find no mention of Cleese playing Gort anywhere except in the TFS above. From the SFFMedia article it links to...
"IGN reports that Cleese will play a physicist Dr. Barnhardt, a Nobel Prize laureate who helps work out why Klaatu and Gort have come to earth."
I know this is
You seem to be making the same point as the GP. After all they did write "stealing songs" (e.g. in quotes) so I think they had realised the point you are making. In any case what you describe is stealing *CDs*, not stealing *songs*
Not for the act of copying the CDs but possibly for breaking the seals and opening them the store might try to get you for criminal damage. Not saying they'd succeed but...
Actually it's to do with one being a *crime* and one not. IANAL etc. but copyright infringement is not a crime (in the UK anyway) unless it's done in the course of a business. So if you were coying those CDs to sell in your own shop, it's a crime. The whole area is grey and murky - just the kind of environment lawyers thrive in.
Whilst the PIN is the weak point in the system (or to be more exact the human is), one would imagine the chip is more secure than the magnetic strip. Taking the example posted elsewhere on here, a card with a chip is less susceptible to a skimming reader which sits on top of the card slot. This being because the chip is not read as it passes through but once it reaches it's destination. If that is interrupted the transaction fails - unlike with a skimmer.
That said the PIN is undoubtedly the weak point. I have often stood in a queue at the supermarket and from fifteen feet away clearly seen the PIN someone is entering. In fact I once observed this with someone I knew and caught them up in the street and told them their PIN number just to demonstrate how easy it is. People are also just too casual with the cards. I always try to insert the card into the reader myself, never give it to the sales assistant and refuse to allow them to insert it into their till while I punch the number into the card reader. I tend to frustrate the assistant who try to press the Enter button to accept the price before handing it to me to enter the pin. The reason for that part is so I can tell if they are charging me what they just said they would!
The whole point of C&P is that the card side of the transaction should not involve the retailer other than knowing if the transaction was successful.
Anybody know if Canonical will (or have) release the source code for Brainstorm? Or is this to be like Launchpad - you know, proprietary.
Granted it's just a web-site but I can think of several projects that could do with something similar and it would seem to be in the spirit of ubuntu.
Just wondering.
That's assuming the ads use an IFrame or similar on the site you are visiting. If they use scripting isn't just as likely the ads will appear to come from the host site rather than Phorm?
Not that it will make much difference, AdBlock+ does a great job for me.
If the shops near me starting playing *any* kind of music "kinda loud". They would have a much bigger issue than "gangs" of young people outside their door.
I live on an estate in the middle of an affluent area just on the border of Greater London and I can confirm that this issue is not unique to new towns miles from a city. We have exactly the same issue and indeed my estate was sadly host to one of the fatal stabbings just before Christmas.
This hits the nail on the head. Current policies for "dealing" with the bored youth are to move them on. Because we are close to the Met Police boundary we have a problem in that our Police will move young people on and they just go down the round into the Met area until they are moved on - at which time they come back. Nobody is addressing the issue - everybody is moving it away from their desk.
Lats night - on the way to pick up a take-away - I walked past a "gang" of youth. Eight lads sitting by some shops. My route was blocked so I just said "excuse me" and - what do you know - they moved. One asked me the time etc etc.
Totally frightening - not!
With regards the Mosquito itself: The most entertaining remedy I saw was to get ten of fifteen 30-40 tr olds to dress up in hoodies and other "youth" wear and hang around outside the shops with the Mosquitos.
It should be pointed out that some excellent books published by Tor have been available as DRM and cost free downloads ( in a variety of formats) for some time.
me too!
Well I guess the patent[1] covers people like Barracuda distributing a single product with SMTP and anti-virus built in not people like us who install an MTA and a virus scanner onto a server and get them to work together.
[1] Just want to point out that I deplore software patents and I am not defending them here. I am just saying that the "remove the code" argument doesn't work in this case as it means Barracuda lose their product.
But the patent wouldn't cover you or I[1] getting a fresh server, installing an MTA, installing a virus scanner and then integrating the two. The patent covers you or I distributing a product which includes those two things as a single service.
Software patents are plain wrong but it's not because an individual claim happens to be obvious, it's because the concept of patents is flawed when applied to software.
[1]Actually it doesn't cover me - I live in the UK
That won't work in this case. The patent is for "A system for detecting and eliminating viruses on a computer network includes a File Transfer Protocol (FTP) proxy server, for controlling the transfer of files and a Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (SMTP) proxy server for controlling the transfer of mail messages through the system." So for Barracuda to comply they must stop scanning e-mails for viruses in their products.
This also means that it is not the use of ClamAV per-se which is being challenged but the fact that Barracuda are providing a server which scans for e-mail viruses. No wonder they are going to fight this - it's yer basic "pay up or close down" threat.
Not that I would mind too much - Barracuda's kit has caused me no end of pain in the last year and I don't even use one!
But surely you are learning from the "mistake" of doing the wrong thing 999 times before. Well you are if you note what you did and try not to repeat it.