The university detected its computer system had been broken into at the end of August, but did not notify the state until Sept. 27 after the school had done its own investigation with the FBI, Strait said.
Are they allowed to do that? Without notifying the state at all? Especially considering that the data that was lost belongs to the state.
Already UC is having a lot of trouble in the (mis)handling of national labs and a few other problems, this would only compound it. Damn.
Anecdotal evidence - I was suggesting implementing some Opensource solutions to a company, and the CIO quotes JWZ -- Linux is nice if you're not constrained on either time or money (don't remember the exact quote).
He felt that rather than train the existing users, use Linux and fix the problems, he would take up a reliable and commercially tested solution - not merely in terms of how it works, but also in terms of usability and support.
I really didn't have a good enough rebuttal to that. However, if we do begin such practices, it adds more credibility, and results in better software - software that the industry would trust _more_ readily than ever before.
In the long term, it would be worth it. Hate it as you will, the precise reason Windows does so well in the market is its user interfaces.
User interfaces play a very very vital role in user behaviour, and usage.
I do not understand the argument that developers should not have good UIs. Why not? Would you not use a Visual IDE for your development if it had more features that you would use? Or would you rather that we all stick to CLI?
In fact, I really *like* Microsoft's Visual Studio.NET's IDE -- it's really quite well done, and very well designed with the developer in mind. And guess what? It increases my productivity by a significant amount when I code.
I'll just say this -- if Linux has to make it big, user interfaces _are_ a big deal.
There is a HCI maxim that says that the best designs are those that you do not notice -- that is what we should be striving for, Opensource or not. You never know who would be using your Opensource application for what.
And a good UI design is only going to help it.
Re:Now if hackers could just learn to hack the gov
on
Good Bad Attitude
·
· Score: 1
What pray tell, made you decide that you were more complex than the common man? Indeed, what prey tell, made you decide that you weren't just another common man?
I was pointing out the differences between two broad generalizations that I had made, nothing more. Where did I say that I was or was not the common man?
Hackers is a very general term - it also includes countless chemists, physicists, mathematicians and biologists out there, too - not merely geeks with their gadgets. Hell, it even includes lawyers and several other professions.
And usually, these people are called hackers precisely because they're so darned good at what they do. That would indeed make them the intellectual elite, no matter how you look at it.
True, some of them may indeed have characteristics in common with what I described, but that is not what drives them. They are worried about those needs because they are essential, but what really motivates them is the work they do. Sure, my physics advisor has a car and a job, but what drives him is not how best he can make some quick cash and go to the Bahamas for a vacation. What drives him is how to prove that odd theorem in physics that no one has proved in a couple of hundred years. What drives him is the single minded devotion to science and striving for scientific truth. And the fact that he has spent his entire life in this pursuit. If that doesn't make him different from the common man, I do not know what does.
It's neither pompous nor humble - it's just a factual statement on the fundamental differences.
I welcome our new IP overlords. Please give me a job, I am also chasing money, it's very instinctive.
Atleast you're honest about it:)
What sucks is when the need for IP is being touted as something else while the real plain and simple reason it exists is for the sake of monetary benefits and nothing more. Protection of intellectual property is a long-gone plight, does not even happen much anymore.
As long as you don't say hacker crackers, all is well;)
Re:Now if hackers could just learn to hack the gov
on
Good Bad Attitude
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
In several ways, perhaps it is not that bad a thing after all - there needs to be a mix of both the kinds - hacker and non-hacker.
The problem with the intellectual elite is just that - they are the intellectual elite. Often times, smart solutions on paper is not the same as applying them in the real world - socialism/communism is a classic example of this.
You can see this at work in real life, when you notice that geeks make bad business men. True, some of what the businesses needs is some amount of bullshitting capability, but that's not always true - it's not enough if you can just code up a smart hack. You need to be able to market it and sell it, if you want to be able to sell it to the _layman_. Hackers miss that vital element - they are almost quite incapable of thinking like the common man.
The common man does not care about the things that hackers care about, his needs are simpler - get the food on the table, buy the new SUV and get a holiday week off to some tropical island.
The problem is that the other side (corporate/government) is extremely anti-liberal, while hackers are most often extremely liberal. Both of these are bad, and a balance needs to be stuck.
We need that - a balance between the two. But entire control of America under hackers may not be a good idea.
It depends on who is monitoring the account, I suppose. But on the whole, I've noticed that Jeff Bates (Jamie) is a whole lot more responsive and fixes the errors.
There've been times when I've mailed DP for someone else's story, and Jeff mails me back. But to be fair, there've been times when Timothy has responded, too.
So, I guess it really is a question of how much time they have - for Slashdot:)
Nevertheless, software vendors have proceeded cautiously on the core question, with rivals IBM, Oracle, Sun, Microsoft and others waiting to see how the others approach the issue, partly to learn what works and partly to have the opportunity to counter, according to DiDio.
Good to see that atleast MS is brave enough to go ahead and do what they will. As much as I do not like their policies, atleast they didn't sit around waiting for others to show the way.
She said IBM is in a different situation since it makes money not only from software and services but also from hardware.
Ofcourse! This would mean that IBM would take up a position that hurt's Microsoft's stance:)
My favourite part -
We developed a security mechanism around that, submitted it to the FCC under the broadcast flag initiative, and the Motion Picture Association and the NFL went ballistic and lobbied incredibly hard. But guess what? It got approved. The FCC supported our technology.
Should the FCC be in the business of regulating new technologies like this one?
Definitely not. It's scary when you feel that you have to go to the FCC for permission to do something. So we're not very comfortable with that. I think the broadcast flag stuff is less onerous than some other things, like the INDUCE Act. That we're much more concerned with because that could lead to prosecution of individuals who induce copyright infringement. That just opens up a whole can of worms. If you upset consumers enough, they'll become pirates, and that law has the potential to do that.
You'll notice that everything on the table in Washington being pushed by the media companies doesn't target regular television. It's targeted at things like ripping DVDs, how long you can keep movies pay-per-view movies, and so on.
Yay! I'm glad that atleast there are _some_ companies out there who feel this way.
Yes, if you upset the consumers enough, we'll all become pirates -- and what do you do when every one out there is a pirate by the **AA's definition?
It's about bloody time that the rest of the media companies out there realize this -- what're they going to do, arrest everyone? Stupidity.
I'm surprised at the resistance that the corporate world is showing in this regard -- they seem to be simply unwilling to adapt to new technologies and new media, and those that do (such as TiVo) actually do well.
I've always liked TiVo, but after the way TiVo handled the recent DRM troubles, I've really begun to respect them a real lot.
Way to go, guys. Goodluck, and may you continue kicking ass;)
No, my theory is that while these bugs are serious in themselves, if I had access to IE's source I maybe able to come up with code that would crash it, too.
Although thousands _can_ see them, very few actually do. There's a difference.
Either way, kudos to him, and a good job at finding the bugs. But that still wouldn't make me change to IE anytime soon.
There's a difference between posting an error message and crashing. So I don't think there's any upside for the other browsers on this issue.
Ofcourse.
Nowhere did I mention that it was so, did I?
I do agree that these are quite serious bugs (both of them seem to be associated with datatypes and boundary checks), however IE's ability to deal with retarded code may be what has saved them this time.
1. Broken HTML is corrected before rendering in IE 2. Therefore, Broken HTML cannot cause the same problems in IE
The fact that even bad code runs is what helps it handle his mangled code. However, the flipside is that this encourages bad code, which is what I meant to say.
Not just that - you have access to the code of all the browsers that he's mentioned (except Opera).
Mozilla, Links and Lynx.
I'm not saying that the bugs do not exist, but if I had access to all that code (and presumably to IE too, since he's been at MS that long) - then it's quite conceivable that he came up with stuff that will crash on these browsers.
-tinfoil hat-
He _does_ work for Microsoft still, does he not?:)
Slashdot Mirror
The university detected its computer system had been broken into at the end of August, but did not notify the state until Sept. 27 after the school had done its own investigation with the FBI, Strait said.
Are they allowed to do that? Without notifying the state at all? Especially considering that the data that was lost belongs to the state.
Already UC is having a lot of trouble in the (mis)handling of national labs and a few other problems, this would only compound it. Damn.
Sheesh!
What're you? Some kinda shrink?
Man, you do realize that you're sounding like Sigmund Freud, right? Stop spooking me out.
And oh, I forgot to add this.
Anecdotal evidence - I was suggesting implementing some Opensource solutions to a company, and the CIO quotes JWZ -- Linux is nice if you're not constrained on either time or money (don't remember the exact quote).
He felt that rather than train the existing users, use Linux and fix the problems, he would take up a reliable and commercially tested solution - not merely in terms of how it works, but also in terms of usability and support.
I really didn't have a good enough rebuttal to that. However, if we do begin such practices, it adds more credibility, and results in better software - software that the industry would trust _more_ readily than ever before.
But then, that's just my opinion.
Short term, yes. Long term, no.
.NET's IDE -- it's really quite well done, and very well designed with the developer in mind. And guess what? It increases my productivity by a significant amount when I code.
In the long term, it would be worth it. Hate it as you will, the precise reason Windows does so well in the market is its user interfaces.
User interfaces play a very very vital role in user behaviour, and usage.
I do not understand the argument that developers should not have good UIs. Why not? Would you not use a Visual IDE for your development if it had more features that you would use? Or would you rather that we all stick to CLI?
In fact, I really *like* Microsoft's Visual Studio
I'll just say this -- if Linux has to make it big, user interfaces _are_ a big deal.
There is a HCI maxim that says that the best designs are those that you do not notice -- that is what we should be striving for, Opensource or not. You never know who would be using your Opensource application for what.
And a good UI design is only going to help it.
What pray tell, made you decide that you were more complex than the common man? Indeed, what prey tell, made you decide that you weren't just another common man?
I was pointing out the differences between two broad generalizations that I had made, nothing more. Where did I say that I was or was not the common man?
Hackers is a very general term - it also includes countless chemists, physicists, mathematicians and biologists out there, too - not merely geeks with their gadgets. Hell, it even includes lawyers and several other professions.
And usually, these people are called hackers precisely because they're so darned good at what they do. That would indeed make them the intellectual elite, no matter how you look at it.
True, some of them may indeed have characteristics in common with what I described, but that is not what drives them. They are worried about those needs because they are essential, but what really motivates them is the work they do. Sure, my physics advisor has a car and a job, but what drives him is not how best he can make some quick cash and go to the Bahamas for a vacation. What drives him is how to prove that odd theorem in physics that no one has proved in a couple of hundred years. What drives him is the single minded devotion to science and striving for scientific truth. And the fact that he has spent his entire life in this pursuit. If that doesn't make him different from the common man, I do not know what does.
It's neither pompous nor humble - it's just a factual statement on the fundamental differences.
I think you mean blue screen ;-)
:-|
I do know that it seems to be a prerequisite for Windows operation, though
Oops! My bad, thank you Oh Grammar Nazi. I bow to thee :)
I welcome our new IP overlords. Please give me a job, I am also chasing money, it's very instinctive.
:)
Atleast you're honest about it
What sucks is when the need for IP is being touted as something else while the real plain and simple reason it exists is for the sake of monetary benefits and nothing more. Protection of intellectual property is a long-gone plight, does not even happen much anymore.
Good one! :)
Whew.
;)
As long as you don't say hacker crackers, all is well
In several ways, perhaps it is not that bad a thing after all - there needs to be a mix of both the kinds - hacker and non-hacker.
The problem with the intellectual elite is just that - they are the intellectual elite. Often times, smart solutions on paper is not the same as applying them in the real world - socialism/communism is a classic example of this.
You can see this at work in real life, when you notice that geeks make bad business men. True, some of what the businesses needs is some amount of bullshitting capability, but that's not always true - it's not enough if you can just code up a smart hack. You need to be able to market it and sell it, if you want to be able to sell it to the _layman_. Hackers miss that vital element - they are almost quite incapable of thinking like the common man.
The common man does not care about the things that hackers care about, his needs are simpler - get the food on the table, buy the new SUV and get a holiday week off to some tropical island.
The problem is that the other side (corporate/government) is extremely anti-liberal, while hackers are most often extremely liberal. Both of these are bad, and a balance needs to be stuck.
We need that - a balance between the two. But entire control of America under hackers may not be a good idea.
Arghh, my bad.
:)
I meant Hemos, thanks
To do so, Powell said, "is to dumb down the Internet back to the limited vision of government officials. That would be a tragedy."
A government official who admits that the government's "vision" is screwed up?
First, Microsoft is not as evil as they could be.
And now, FCC actually wants to help the users?
Next you'd be telling me there are no dupes on Slashdot.
What's this, the second coming of Christ or something?
Sheesh!
And now, I'm getting a first post too?
For subscriber preview, you have an e-mail address you can mail to if you notice any errors/mistakes that you may see in the story.
That e-mail address happens to be daddypants @ slashdot.org, hence the parent poster's comment.
It depends on who is monitoring the account, I suppose. But on the whole, I've noticed that Jeff Bates (Jamie) is a whole lot more responsive and fixes the errors.
:)
There've been times when I've mailed DP for someone else's story, and Jeff mails me back. But to be fair, there've been times when Timothy has responded, too.
So, I guess it really is a question of how much time they have - for Slashdot
Nevertheless, software vendors have proceeded cautiously on the core question, with rivals IBM, Oracle, Sun, Microsoft and others waiting to see how the others approach the issue, partly to learn what works and partly to have the opportunity to counter, according to DiDio.
:)
Good to see that atleast MS is brave enough to go ahead and do what they will. As much as I do not like their policies, atleast they didn't sit around waiting for others to show the way.
She said IBM is in a different situation since it makes money not only from software and services but also from hardware.
Ofcourse! This would mean that IBM would take up a position that hurt's Microsoft's stance
Should prove interesting.
. If the TiVo won't work as-is on a network, I know I can modify the software before sticking the new disk in.
Be careful, though. TiVo voids your warranty if you modify the software of your own (i.e. a non-TiVo upate).
My favourite part -
;)
We developed a security mechanism around that, submitted it to the FCC under the broadcast flag initiative, and the Motion Picture Association and the NFL went ballistic and lobbied incredibly hard. But guess what? It got approved. The FCC supported our technology.
Should the FCC be in the business of regulating new technologies like this one?
Definitely not. It's scary when you feel that you have to go to the FCC for permission to do something. So we're not very comfortable with that. I think the broadcast flag stuff is less onerous than some other things, like the INDUCE Act. That we're much more concerned with because that could lead to prosecution of individuals who induce copyright infringement. That just opens up a whole can of worms. If you upset consumers enough, they'll become pirates, and that law has the potential to do that.
You'll notice that everything on the table in Washington being pushed by the media companies doesn't target regular television. It's targeted at things like ripping DVDs, how long you can keep movies pay-per-view movies, and so on.
Yay! I'm glad that atleast there are _some_ companies out there who feel this way.
Yes, if you upset the consumers enough, we'll all become pirates -- and what do you do when every one out there is a pirate by the **AA's definition?
It's about bloody time that the rest of the media companies out there realize this -- what're they going to do, arrest everyone? Stupidity.
I'm surprised at the resistance that the corporate world is showing in this regard -- they seem to be simply unwilling to adapt to new technologies and new media, and those that do (such as TiVo) actually do well.
I've always liked TiVo, but after the way TiVo handled the recent DRM troubles, I've really begun to respect them a real lot.
Way to go, guys. Goodluck, and may you continue kicking ass
No, my theory is that while these bugs are serious in themselves, if I had access to IE's source I maybe able to come up with code that would crash it, too.
Although thousands _can_ see them, very few actually do. There's a difference.
Either way, kudos to him, and a good job at finding the bugs. But that still wouldn't make me change to IE anytime soon.
There's a difference between posting an error message and crashing. So I don't think there's any upside for the other browsers on this issue.
Ofcourse.
Nowhere did I mention that it was so, did I?
I do agree that these are quite serious bugs (both of them seem to be associated with datatypes and boundary checks), however IE's ability to deal with retarded code may be what has saved them this time.
Here's the mozilla_die1.html codeAnd the mozilla_die2.html codeIt looks like he came across places where either boundary checks or type checks are not in place.
Besides, he's had access to almost all the browswer code, hasn't he?
I mean, these bugs are bad, but I'm sure if I had access to IE's code I could come up with a zillion bugs.
I know.
What I meant was this -
1. Broken HTML is corrected before rendering in IE
2. Therefore, Broken HTML cannot cause the same problems in IE
The fact that even bad code runs is what helps it handle his mangled code. However, the flipside is that this encourages bad code, which is what I meant to say.
I know what he was talking about - my point was merely to highlight that IE has a robust renderer.
The renderer adequately makes up for errors in the HTML code, and consequently there are fewer crashes.
The same thing that helps it render bad code helps it withstand what he's just done. I merely said that there is a _downside_ to that capability, too.
Duh. Get it now?
Not just that - you have access to the code of all the browsers that he's mentioned (except Opera).
:)
Mozilla, Links and Lynx.
I'm not saying that the bugs do not exist, but if I had access to all that code (and presumably to IE too, since he's been at MS that long) - then it's quite conceivable that he came up with stuff that will crash on these browsers.
-tinfoil hat-
He _does_ work for Microsoft still, does he not?
-/tinfoil hat-
It's quite known that broken code runs quite well on IE.
Great, but then it also encourages people to write bad code - see all that code with broken tables and a million tags that remain unclosed?
Thank webmasters (if they can be called that) who tested their code solely on IE for that.
And lately, writing bad HTML has become the norm rather than exception.