It fits nicely into the whole financial theory. Passive object Consumer (C) is convinced by active object Marketing Department (M) to purchase passive object Product (P), created by passive objects Employees (E) under the employ of the active object Owner (O). Add it all up, and you get a nice tity profit (n) for the Owner.
(C + M) + P(E) = O(n)
(A very efficent method, eh?)
-- Well, considering that this seems to be a linear function, it is somewhat efficient, but nothing like O(log(n)) or O(log(log(n)).:-)
I read this book a long time ago, and it was one of a number of good books that helped my (basic) understanding of atomic weapons.
Rhodes has a real mastery of the history of the development of nuclear arms. Any of his writings are well worth reading.
When I was in college, they had a copy of the US Army strategic bombing survey [of the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki] in the library. I do not know the exact, precise, formal title, and this was not a terribly large book - it was pretty concise. However, it presents the results of the study of the nature of the damage inflicted on the two cities, describes effects related to the nature and structure of buildings, terrains, and other characteristics particular to each city. I don't remember the degree to which the human toll was documented, but I am sure that it was addressed.
I recall that the strategic bombing survey report helped give a respect for the nature (and consequences) of these weapons in a manner that was more lasting than other works.
You might have the right to attack ("strike back") a site. You probably (in almost all cases) do not.
What if you do your analysis work, pick the site to strikeback against, and are totally wrong ? What if that site also supports innocent clients / subscribers to its services?
What if it supports large numbers of financial transactions?
What if it belongs to a charity?
What if it supports military operations?
What if the "innocent" site then counter-strikes you? This would be (by the presented logic), justified. Are you then justified to commit a counter-counter-counter strike?
I see fantastic liability for an individual or organization if they attack a system and are wrong about the source of the attack the are retaliating against.
I don't think that the article reflects the overall picture in CS - just the picture evolving out of high schools, but not who is actually in the college classes.
I have 15 years of various academic studies, all CS-related. Throughout, I have seen a fair share of girls / women in these classes - not necessarily 50%, but a fair share.
What I did notice, is that the women in these courses were typically from India, China, Russia, or the Mediterranean, and on rare occassion - perhaps Eastern Europe.
I did not personally notice the girls being treated any differently than the guys with regard to academic standards or grading. Also, ultimately, I question a tenent at the end of the article - that programming is critical to CS / IT. It may be important, but lots of jobs and interests may be devoted to non-programming aspects of CS : varying forms of analysis and IT do not necessarily have strong programming prerequisites, and much advanced CS boils down to discrete math issues. You can learn programming if need be in college, but having a good math foundation is most helpful.
Is this going to be the top priority for European enforcement? I really doubt it.
I think that from the perspective of deciding how to use their resources, European nations have have bigger concerns than where the DVD players are coming from... and any associated patent issues.
A few might be taken off the streets, but I doubt they are going to expend great resources to rid Europe of "unauthorized" or "unlicensed" machines...
Reverse engineering cuecat issues...
Cue cat and Linux...
Privacy and CueCat
Modifying your cuecat for enhancing your privacy ("Neutering" your cuecat).
I got mine free from Wired magazine... It's still sitting in its box. As I recall, they received some unhappy letters to the editor after shipping these things out...
In word, make a resume with each section that you -might- ever use.
For sections that you might want to abbreviate, provide a second version right there.
From there, you can make a complete resume with no redundant sections - use the longer version of any sections that you duplicate. This could be the follow-up resume that you bring with you to an interview, or as a response to follow-up questions.
You can make a concise resume from any sections of the above resume as needed. Just modify this master as necessary, and pull sections that you want towards any specific application.
Sections that you might want to include in the full, detailed master, might include activities, group memberships, publications, etc... The abridged version could just allude to these.
Sam Nitzberg
sam@iamsam.com
http://www.iamsam.com
http://www.iamsam.com/resume.html
My experience with an "IP agreement" was one of severest professional displeasure, and I feel that I can offer some advice based on my own "IP Disagreement." experience...
I had been working for a contracting/consulting firm for 9 years when I (amongst others) were notified that there would be an updated "employee agreement" (quotes used to express irony and sarcasm) that would be the basis for continued employment.
I expected a reasonable document that I could sign without concern, but that wasn't to be the case.
This contract was a real masterwork (more sarcasm:)
Basically, the document was extremely broadly worded, and contained an unusually broad non-compete clause that could have greatly limited my professional opportunities. Also put in jeopardy could be any projects that I had worked on during the almost 15 years of my technical college studies (B.S. through post-grad), and ideas that I had been working on for publication, due to the extremely nebulously worded clauses of the contract concerning intellectual property and items that the company would find of interest. Similarly, I would have been expected to disclose any inventions that I had an interest in planning or developing. I am keeping this short, but the terms were potentially punishing. There were many unusual and broadly worded clauses. I would have to depend upon their kindnesses that their intent would not be malicious.
In short order, I let my immediate boss know that a "grievous error" had been made. He got back to me shortly thereafter to let me know that we should be able to work things out. I was also informed verbally later that the company did not intend to fire me over this document.
Over a roughly six-month period, I spent an enormous amount of time reviewing this document. I briefly spoke with an attorney, spoke with co-workers, and studied this document silly. A number of sessions were held where others or I discussed with management our concerns regarding this document, and I was assured that we could come up with something that I could sign. I would have rather had grandfathered the original, reasonable non-disclosure agreement that I signed upon accepting employment, but that wasn't acceptable to the powers that were. The changes that were being made did not approach anything that I would find acceptable.
Eventually, I was informed that anyone not signing would "hazard" certain benefits. A stock-options benefit would not be granted to anyone not signing.
So, the situation went over several months to my receiving an unacceptable agreement as terms of employment, to being kind-of-told that I wouldn't be fired if I didn't sign, to being told that I could stay as an employee, but would sacrifice certain benefits. This was becoming simply ludicrous.
I eventually told management that I had wasted too much time and effort on matters associated with this document, and wouldn't consider or discuss it further.
When I received the original "agreement," my resume went out to several companies immediately; I didn't know if I would have a job in as little as two weeks. As a result of my resume going out, I did speak with a number of firms, and receive a job offer (about 6 months later) that was desirable and that I chose to accept. I did cite my primary reason for quitting my job as the severity and poor handling of the employee contracts. Congratulations, they managed to push me out. I guess experienced information security specialists are easy to find (elsewhere) and retain:)
A few pointers from my experience :
If you feel that negotiations are a pushing-uphill experience, look elsewhere. There is a reason things aren't moving smoothly.
If a company's representative (especially HR) tells you that this sort of document is for your own good, run.
If a company has representatives telling you that this is fair, while other company representatives tell you that their document is not fair, but exists to protect their interests, run like hell.
Don't believe everything that their lawyers or people tell you. Get your own lawyer if necessary, and if possible, one who specializes in IP. He (or she) will know the games and intentions...
Before formally accepting a job, ask to be sent copies of their employee and IP contracts. Don't just show up for your first day at work, after you have quit your previous job, just to be hit with a contract that you might not be prepared for. If the wording is at all ambiguous, there is a fundamental problem... It may be ambiguous to afford them protections and make their actions and property-owning options as broad as possible.
You might wish to consider signing a broad contract if the company really makes it worth your while. Know what your price is, but know that you don't want to forsake your future, either.
I believe that IP will be of increasing concern to all technologists, especially those who work on their own projects or ideas, or are aggressively involved in academic study.
Don't try to play language-lawyer with these documents. If you are unsure as to the meaning, a corporate rep will be happy to explain anything to you in nice, sun-shiny terms. It is also possible to very easily misinterpret the legality or unenforceability of any clause. An intellectual property lawyer can tell you where you really stand. Also note that you can expect that if your company is headquartered in another state, that you may expect actions to be filed against you in that state should the company try to take action against you. Even if their hand is weak, they can cause a very real headache.
I think that in highly creative areas involving the use of technology, IP will be a key issue. I have e-mailed someone at 2600 magazine, and would like to see an Intellectual Property panel (or at least a panel with a discussion of IP issues represented) at the next HOPE (Hackers on Planet Earth) conference. I think that in security and technology, many people will have to get aware of what's involved with these contracts before they risk finding out the hardway. I also plan to propose something similar for Defcon in 2002.
A resource :
The IEEE (Institute for Electrical and Electronics Engineers) has an intellectual property committee whose web address follows :
http://www.ieeeusa.org/committees/ipc/
Amongst its interests, is taking action to seek laws limiting the extent to which IP agreements can intrude on the IP rights of engineers and others.
This site also has valuable information on IP.
Slashdot Mirror
It fits nicely into the whole financial theory. Passive object Consumer (C) is convinced by active object Marketing Department (M) to purchase passive object Product (P), created by passive objects Employees (E) under the employ of the active object Owner (O). Add it all up, and you get a nice tity profit (n) for the Owner.
:-)
(C + M) + P(E) = O(n)
(A very efficent method, eh?)
-- Well, considering that this seems to be a linear function, it is somewhat efficient, but nothing like O(log(n)) or O(log(log(n)).
Sam
http://www.iamsam.com
I read this book a long time ago, and it was one of a number of good books that helped my (basic) understanding of atomic weapons.
Rhodes has a real mastery of the history of the development of nuclear arms. Any of his writings are well worth reading.
When I was in college, they had a copy of the US Army strategic bombing survey [of the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki] in the library. I do not know the exact, precise, formal title, and this was not a terribly large book - it was pretty concise. However, it presents the results of the study of the nature of the damage inflicted on the two cities, describes effects related to the nature and structure of buildings, terrains, and other characteristics particular to each city. I don't remember the degree to which the human toll was documented, but I am sure that it was addressed.
I recall that the strategic bombing survey report helped give a respect for the nature (and consequences) of these weapons in a manner that was more lasting than other works.
Sam Nitzberg
http://www.iamsam.com
cpio
Another good use for my Captain Crunch whistle...
At 6 % unemployment and climbing, we seem to be heading very quickly towards a "cashless society"
a Word Macro for 2600 emulation.
Sam
"The following music you are about to listen to is copyrighted material. Any unauthorized copying of this material is a felony offense."
;-)
No, No, No !
This would have to be called the special value-added "FBI Bonus Track"
Sam
You might have the right to attack ("strike back") a site. You probably (in almost all cases) do not.
What if you do your analysis work, pick the site to strikeback against, and are totally wrong ? What if that site also supports innocent clients / subscribers to its services?
What if it supports large numbers of financial transactions?
What if it belongs to a charity?
What if it supports military operations?
What if the "innocent" site then counter-strikes you? This would be (by the presented logic), justified. Are you then justified to commit a counter-counter-counter strike?
I see fantastic liability for an individual or organization if they attack a system and are wrong about the source of the attack the are retaliating against.
Sam Nitzberg
sam@iamsam.com
http://www.iamsam.com
I don't think that the article reflects the overall picture in CS - just the picture evolving out of high schools, but not who is actually in the college classes.
I have 15 years of various academic studies, all CS-related. Throughout, I have seen a fair share of girls / women in these classes - not necessarily 50%, but a fair share.
What I did notice, is that the women in these courses were typically from India, China, Russia, or the Mediterranean, and on rare occassion - perhaps Eastern Europe.
I did not personally notice the girls being treated any differently than the guys with regard to academic standards or grading. Also, ultimately, I question a tenent at the end of the article - that programming is critical to CS / IT. It may be important, but lots of jobs and interests may be devoted to non-programming aspects of CS : varying forms of analysis and IT do not necessarily have strong programming prerequisites, and much advanced CS boils down to discrete math issues. You can learn programming if need be in college, but having a good math foundation is most helpful.
Sam Nitzberg
sam@iamsam.com
http://www.iamsam.com
Is this going to be the top priority for European enforcement? I really doubt it.
I think that from the perspective of deciding how to use their resources, European nations have have bigger concerns than where the DVD players are coming from... and any associated patent issues.
A few might be taken off the streets, but I doubt they are going to expend great resources to rid Europe of "unauthorized" or "unlicensed" machines...
Sam Nitzberg
sam@iamsam.com
http://www.iamsam.com
http://www.cexx.org/cuecat.htm
This link covers...
Reverse engineering cuecat issues...
Cue cat and Linux...
Privacy and CueCat
Modifying your cuecat for enhancing your privacy ("Neutering" your cuecat).
I got mine free from Wired magazine... It's still sitting in its box. As I recall, they received some unhappy letters to the editor after shipping these things out...
Sam Nitzberg
sam@iamsam.com
http://www.iamsam.com
You want a lawyer that specializes in - - IP law - -.
I can recommend one that I have used once (I have no financial interest in this firm) in looking into patent issues.
I used Woodbridge Associates in Princeton, NJ. (There is contact info. at : http://www.njiplaw.com/
)
My guess is that they have no claim. Unless you and they signed agreements transferring rights to them. But, you need a lawyer...
Sam Nitzberg
sam@iamsam.com
http://www.iamsam.com
In word, make a resume with each section that you -might- ever use.
For sections that you might want to abbreviate, provide a second version right there.
From there, you can make a complete resume with no redundant sections - use the longer version of any sections that you duplicate. This could be the follow-up resume that you bring with you to an interview, or as a response to follow-up questions.
You can make a concise resume from any sections of the above resume as needed. Just modify this master as necessary, and pull sections that you want towards any specific application.
Sections that you might want to include in the full, detailed master, might include activities, group memberships, publications, etc... The abridged version could just allude to these.
Sam Nitzberg
sam@iamsam.com
http://www.iamsam.com
http://www.iamsam.com/resume.html
I had been working for a contracting/consulting firm for 9 years when I (amongst others) were notified that there would be an updated "employee agreement" (quotes used to express irony and sarcasm) that would be the basis for continued employment.
I expected a reasonable document that I could sign without concern, but that wasn't to be the case. This contract was a real masterwork (more sarcasm :)
Basically, the document was extremely broadly worded, and contained an unusually broad non-compete clause that could have greatly limited my professional opportunities. Also put in jeopardy could be any projects that I had worked on during the almost 15 years of my technical college studies (B.S. through post-grad), and ideas that I had been working on for publication, due to the extremely nebulously worded clauses of the contract concerning intellectual property and items that the company would find of interest. Similarly, I would have been expected to disclose any inventions that I had an interest in planning or developing. I am keeping this short, but the terms were potentially punishing. There were many unusual and broadly worded clauses. I would have to depend upon their kindnesses that their intent would not be malicious.
In short order, I let my immediate boss know that a "grievous error" had been made. He got back to me shortly thereafter to let me know that we should be able to work things out. I was also informed verbally later that the company did not intend to fire me over this document.
Over a roughly six-month period, I spent an enormous amount of time reviewing this document. I briefly spoke with an attorney, spoke with co-workers, and studied this document silly. A number of sessions were held where others or I discussed with management our concerns regarding this document, and I was assured that we could come up with something that I could sign. I would have rather had grandfathered the original, reasonable non-disclosure agreement that I signed upon accepting employment, but that wasn't acceptable to the powers that were. The changes that were being made did not approach anything that I would find acceptable.
Eventually, I was informed that anyone not signing would "hazard" certain benefits. A stock-options benefit would not be granted to anyone not signing.
So, the situation went over several months to my receiving an unacceptable agreement as terms of employment, to being kind-of-told that I wouldn't be fired if I didn't sign, to being told that I could stay as an employee, but would sacrifice certain benefits. This was becoming simply ludicrous.
I eventually told management that I had wasted too much time and effort on matters associated with this document, and wouldn't consider or discuss it further.
When I received the original "agreement," my resume went out to several companies immediately; I didn't know if I would have a job in as little as two weeks. As a result of my resume going out, I did speak with a number of firms, and receive a job offer (about 6 months later) that was desirable and that I chose to accept. I did cite my primary reason for quitting my job as the severity and poor handling of the employee contracts. Congratulations, they managed to push me out. I guess experienced information security specialists are easy to find (elsewhere) and retain :)
A few pointers from my experience :
If you feel that negotiations are a pushing-uphill experience, look elsewhere. There is a reason things aren't moving smoothly.
If a company's representative (especially HR) tells you that this sort of document is for your own good, run.
If a company has representatives telling you that this is fair, while other company representatives tell you that their document is not fair, but exists to protect their interests, run like hell.
Don't believe everything that their lawyers or people tell you. Get your own lawyer if necessary, and if possible, one who specializes in IP. He (or she) will know the games and intentions...
Before formally accepting a job, ask to be sent copies of their employee and IP contracts. Don't just show up for your first day at work, after you have quit your previous job, just to be hit with a contract that you might not be prepared for. If the wording is at all ambiguous, there is a fundamental problem... It may be ambiguous to afford them protections and make their actions and property-owning options as broad as possible.
You might wish to consider signing a broad contract if the company really makes it worth your while. Know what your price is, but know that you don't want to forsake your future, either.
I believe that IP will be of increasing concern to all technologists, especially those who work on their own projects or ideas, or are aggressively involved in academic study.
Don't try to play language-lawyer with these documents. If you are unsure as to the meaning, a corporate rep will be happy to explain anything to you in nice, sun-shiny terms. It is also possible to very easily misinterpret the legality or unenforceability of any clause. An intellectual property lawyer can tell you where you really stand. Also note that you can expect that if your company is headquartered in another state, that you may expect actions to be filed against you in that state should the company try to take action against you. Even if their hand is weak, they can cause a very real headache.
I think that in highly creative areas involving the use of technology, IP will be a key issue. I have e-mailed someone at 2600 magazine, and would like to see an Intellectual Property panel (or at least a panel with a discussion of IP issues represented) at the next HOPE (Hackers on Planet Earth) conference. I think that in security and technology, many people will have to get aware of what's involved with these contracts before they risk finding out the hardway. I also plan to propose something similar for Defcon in 2002.
A resource :
The IEEE (Institute for Electrical and Electronics Engineers) has an intellectual property committee whose web address follows : http://www.ieeeusa.org/committees/ipc/ Amongst its interests, is taking action to seek laws limiting the extent to which IP agreements can intrude on the IP rights of engineers and others. This site also has valuable information on IP.
Sam Nitzberg
sam@iamsam.com
http://www.iamsam.com