What is really happening is that the professor is using a grading mechanism that is seriously open to abuse. He has jumped on someone who has visibly broken it, he is letting those who break it quietly go free. This is dishonest or perhaps naive.
If 10% of the marks can be gained in unsupervised work then some will seek help - this he deems cheating. To not expect some students to do this shows little insight into human behaviour.
There have been recent rumblings in the UK of exam-counting homework where parents have helped their kids to produce work that was above what the kid could have done themselves. Is this really a fair way of conducting exams ? If the students really learn through the help then there is nothing wrong, but if they do not then they achieve grades that they do not deserve.
What is needed is a proper evauation of teaching and grading methods. Perhaps each bit of course work should be followed by a viva that would let the professor learn if the student really understood what they had written, that however is probably more work than the professor is willing to do.
No you can't... but if, years ago, you wrote up what you were doing, ie ''published the idea'' then what you were doing could help to destroy this patent on the grounds of prior art. This would not just help Limelight but would stop Akamai coming after you and stopping you from continuing to do something that you have done from before they filed their patent.
This should be a lesson to us all. If you do something that might be novel - publish, like that you stop someone from patenting the idea and stopping you from doing something that you invented. Yes: you might not be the first to 'invent' it, many people can have the same idea, you will probably never know who invited it first.
Publishing something is cheap; if we all do this we can help in mutual protection against patents.
What is really needed is that the cards have an integral keypad - so that communication between the chip and the keypad cannot be intercepted, you entering your PIN would activate the card that could then talk over an encrypted link (eg SSL) directly to the bank's computer.
OK: this would make the cards somewhat bulky and since people tend to have several cards their pockets would bulge. So why not allow people to buy their own small keypads (which they trust to not have been tampered with) that they can plug their cards into and plug the whole lot into the retailer's machine.
He is starting from the wrong position. He seems to think that software has to be written by companies for sale to customers. He thinks that increasing profit comes from making lots more sales.
Wrong. Increasing profit can also come from reduction in costs.
90% of software is written within organisations and never sees light of day outside of the organisations that create it. This is in spite of many organisations sharing some common problems/needs, even if much is specific/unique to them. Most of these organisations are not in the business of selling programs, they run factories, trains, banks,...
What Open Source does is to liberate a little of this 90%, the bits which other organisations might find useful and can easily adopt into their IT systems. The companies that release it get: feedback, bug fixes and enhacements. The guys who receive/use the software send their patches back because doing so is less (long term) work than putting the patches into each new release that comes out.
This is how Open Source works. It does not depend on software houses to sell to users, the profit does not come from software sales, it comes from cost reduction by those who use the software.
Yes, there are those who make a living from support, from the big guys like Red Hat to the small ones like myself; but the greatest profit from Open Source is the cost reduction in the users.
let's give them a nice long list of other stupid patents that they ought to pay off from the public purse. They will eventually get the idea that what they are proposing is stupid... unless they get large 'research grants' from banks and/or patent trolls in which case they will keep their eyes tightly shut.
is to add a couple of links to some of their sites (in different top level domains) from your site.
This will increase their search engine rating and also introduce more people to them - as they browse your site.
This is a real way of hitting back - respond to this attempt at burying WikiLeaks by giving them extra publicity!
Suppose I work for large corporate X, I know that the shares will move, so I tell my mate how to crack a machine to find something to support that view, he does so & invests appropriately and if caught just says he hacked a machine.
If he were to say that I told him, them we would have the book thrown at us... but if he cracks a machine then all is OK
The Olympics is about money, not sport - that died some years back. These restrictions are NOT of Chinese doing, it is the IOC that is doing it for it's own profit and that of the sponsors. It would be interesting to see how much money changes hands in brown paper bags.
I shall not be watching - so don't count my eyes when you work out what the TV rights will cost.
This is starting to have the air of an old vampire film, SCO, the undead, keeps on rising up after being killed. Are we sure that they have not taken Peter Cushing on as CEO ?
What we need now is lots of garlic and some wooden stakes to ensure that it stays dead!
The Church of Scientology says a group that has been protesting against the church are religious bigots that are merely perpetrating religious hate crimes
That can't apply to the Scientologists - they are not a religion, they are a business that conns money out of those who it brainwashes/fools.
No, I mean the real reason why this is happening, not the crappy ''we must be more secure'' line that doesn't really hold water for the cost/inconvenience/loss-of-liberty that is causes? We have lived quite happyily for years without this.
Because we can - we shall!
Convince the public that we are doing this in the name of their security - and get reelected
Because the security crowd (bureaucrats) needs to meet it's growth formula (see 'The Law' by C Northcote Parkinson)
9/11... errm, something to do with that
We have got to do something with those shiny new computers that we want to buy
We are running out of data to loose on laptops - we need to gather some more
EU/USA/... pissing contest - see who can do more in the name of phony security
Perception is important -- most of the pointy haired types don't really understand the issues; if the competition shouts loudly with noises about ''not wanting to fix a security bug'' they will believe it.
The next thing is that anything *nix or open source is not really interested in security.
Remember that it is easier to loose reputation than to gain it.
and as accurate as those available directly from the WV Assessor, then the Assessor should take no interest.
She can solve that easily by putting the map publication dates on the web.
A lot of what he was talking about was how this or that tiny feature had changed from MS Win XP and that he had to think or make an extra click or two to achieve the same result. With people as conservative as that the widespread adoption of a Linux desktop is a long way away.
Trouble is that in my professional life (where I do encourage a Linux desktop) this is exactly the sort of attitude that I see: people do not like a single iota of change. This means that anything where a Linux desktop is different it is thus, by definition, wrong and broken. It takes a lot of things that the Linux desktop CAN do that MS Windows can't to make it seem about equal in many people's minds.
Don't get me wrong: I am not saying that everyone things like this, just that many do. The big problem is that us techies (who love new things) just can't get our heads round this. Until we do: pushing a Linux desktop will be difficult.
The PCs/phones/... are out of your sight, what did they do with them other than steal your files ? Install a key logger or something - to sniff your passwords when you next go on line ?
I am starting to think that after crossing borders: PC should be reinstalled from known media.
BTW: If you told them that/dev/random contained a lot of data - how much would they copy ?
No, the RIAA will sue you for giving others copies of music. After all: you had the choice of not getting on that plane, do were not under absolute imperative to give the customs your MP3.
Fine print in the bill would limit the time in which a patent could be challenged, by anyone other than those suffering direct financial harm, to one year after the patent's grant.
Simple: The EFF buy one copy of software from someone who has had to pay patent extortion. The price that the EFF paid was presumably higher than it would have been if the software house did not have to pay patent dues... thus the EFF has suffered financially.
Slashdot Mirror
If 10% of the marks can be gained in unsupervised work then some will seek help - this he deems cheating. To not expect some students to do this shows little insight into human behaviour.
There have been recent rumblings in the UK of exam-counting homework where parents have helped their kids to produce work that was above what the kid could have done themselves. Is this really a fair way of conducting exams ? If the students really learn through the help then there is nothing wrong, but if they do not then they achieve grades that they do not deserve.
What is needed is a proper evauation of teaching and grading methods. Perhaps each bit of course work should be followed by a viva that would let the professor learn if the student really understood what they had written, that however is probably more work than the professor is willing to do.
This should be a lesson to us all. If you do something that might be novel - publish, like that you stop someone from patenting the idea and stopping you from doing something that you invented. Yes: you might not be the first to 'invent' it, many people can have the same idea, you will probably never know who invited it first.
Publishing something is cheap; if we all do this we can help in mutual protection against patents.
OK: this would make the cards somewhat bulky and since people tend to have several cards their pockets would bulge. So why not allow people to buy their own small keypads (which they trust to not have been tampered with) that they can plug their cards into and plug the whole lot into the retailer's machine.
Wrong. Increasing profit can also come from reduction in costs.
90% of software is written within organisations and never sees light of day outside of the organisations that create it. This is in spite of many organisations sharing some common problems/needs, even if much is specific/unique to them. Most of these organisations are not in the business of selling programs, they run factories, trains, banks, ...
What Open Source does is to liberate a little of this 90%, the bits which other organisations might find useful and can easily adopt into their IT systems. The companies that release it get: feedback, bug fixes and enhacements. The guys who receive/use the software send their patches back because doing so is less (long term) work than putting the patches into each new release that comes out.
This is how Open Source works. It does not depend on software houses to sell to users, the profit does not come from software sales, it comes from cost reduction by those who use the software.
Yes, there are those who make a living from support, from the big guys like Red Hat to the small ones like myself; but the greatest profit from Open Source is the cost reduction in the users.
I notice that his mirror has exceeded permitted bandwidth due to slashdotting, so presumably it will cost him $19,462 in excess bandwidth charges :-)
let's give them a nice long list of other stupid patents that they ought to pay off from the public purse. They will eventually get the idea that what they are proposing is stupid ... unless they get large 'research grants' from banks and/or patent trolls in which case they will keep their eyes tightly shut.
This is a real way of hitting back - respond to this attempt at burying WikiLeaks by giving them extra publicity!
If he were to say that I told him, them we would have the book thrown at us ... but if he cracks a machine then all is OK
Stupid!
I shall not be watching - so don't count my eyes when you work out what the TV rights will cost.
What we need now is lots of garlic and some wooden stakes to ensure that it stays dead!
is going to need all the extra cash after Heather Mills has taken him to the cleaners!
He is a Kernel file system hacker, not a Cyrus Imap hacker -- they have the wrong man :-)
The next thing is that anything *nix or open source is not really interested in security.
Remember that it is easier to loose reputation than to gain it.
Can someone say how hard a fix would be ? Surely: for the sake of a bit of work they are committing a public relations blunder!
These things don't generate much energy, but should be enough to power a perpetual tiny rendition of Gene Kelly' 1952 hit film.
and as accurate as those available directly from the WV Assessor, then the Assessor should take no interest. She can solve that easily by putting the map publication dates on the web.
Trouble is that in my professional life (where I do encourage a Linux desktop) this is exactly the sort of attitude that I see: people do not like a single iota of change. This means that anything where a Linux desktop is different it is thus, by definition, wrong and broken. It takes a lot of things that the Linux desktop CAN do that MS Windows can't to make it seem about equal in many people's minds.
Don't get me wrong: I am not saying that everyone things like this, just that many do. The big problem is that us techies (who love new things) just can't get our heads round this. Until we do: pushing a Linux desktop will be difficult.
So guys: learn from what he says.
I am starting to think that after crossing borders: PC should be reinstalled from known media.
BTW: If you told them that /dev/random contained a lot of data - how much would they copy ?
No, the RIAA will sue you for giving others copies of music. After all: you had the choice of not getting on that plane, do were not under absolute imperative to give the customs your MP3.
As for you who pay for it .....
Simple: The EFF buy one copy of software from someone who has had to pay patent extortion. The price that the EFF paid was presumably higher than it would have been if the software house did not have to pay patent dues ... thus the EFF has suffered financially.
Play these parasites at their own game!
Rugby
And can I have some ?