Great plan! Then the sharedholders can sue the board, and they can sue the producer, and he can sue the code and crayon monkeys! Lawyers can fix anything!
Now what site do you check for news about your town, as opposed to some other town?
Does it matter? A free site, or no site. The significant factor in the decision (for many eyeballs) is a barrier to entry, not the availability of a free alternative.
Either way, the pay site has lost eyeballs and advertising revenue in return for nothing.
Data are just electrical impulses. All he was doing was sharing those impulses without the permission of the person that created them. Fight- I mean, share the power!
Well, I guess it's not exactly the same. Given the collaborative international nature of the effort, I can guarantee that it'll take five times as long to get going as Apollo, cost ten times as much (mostly in pork), and it'll be nobody's fault when it fails. Except maybe the French.
So, you're saying that the least that I can expect to earn the moment I graduate is the median (household!) income? So I'm above average after the first pay review?
You're not exactly putting me off lawyering as a career, buddy.
You must be lost - this is a thread about the privacy implications, not the effectiveness or cost. Perhaps you meant to piggyback your opinion somewhere else?
You know that when you step outside your door, other people can actually see you, right? Your Mak'tar stealth haze isn't working.
If you want to protect your privacy from prying eyes, you can wear a hoodie, burqa or that tiresome de rigueur V mask that all the cool paranoid kids are sporting, anywhere you like in public, without let or hindrance. The UK isn't France.
Being thrashed by sadists while you pucker up and gasp "Thank you sir, may I have another" is the best training for an entry level position in commercial games development.
Making the hack obvious before the "results" were in was exactly the wrong thing to do.
The right thing to do would have been to subvert the results, then mail the chosen numbers and other evidence that you'd owned the system to various news outlets just prior to the tally being announced. Let them embarrass themselves by claiming that the system worked and was secure.
Remember, the worst vulnerability is the one you never discover, or admit to.
The statute is a strict liability offence of failure to provide. It's very carefully worded so that the onus is on you to unencrypt. And no, you don't create any reasonable doubt by claiming that the disk actually contains 500GB of random data.
Unfortunately, it's failure to provide, not refusal to provide, and it's a strict liability offence. To save time, the next bullshit coulda-shoulda-woulda defence you'll suggest is that the disc is full of 500GB of random data, rather than password encrypted data. That fails the "beyond reasonable doubt" laugh test.
Uh... if China closed its ports tomorrow, who would blink first: them, or the rest of the world?
Up to now, China has been a most benign economic superpower, certainly far less abusive than Russia, the EU or the USA who engage in round-robin economic blackmail pretty much constantly.
If China ever start punching at their actual weight - for example, asking what exactly they can buy with the trillions of foreign currency that they're sitting on - then we'll all be they beeyatches.
I suspect some lawyer in BT group broke/bent a few rules
Above the law? I am the lawyer!
Actually, I doubt there was a lawyer involved, since the first thing every corporate lawyer learns in the first week of the job is to say no to everything, always.
And it's exactly that "screw the developer community" attitude that killed XO-1 as an interesting platform.
Here's the crib notes: if you're going to ship a Windows device, you just order a million EEE PCs and sell them at cost, with a solar cell to charge the battery. Heck, you could ship Linux distros on them. XO-1 was always a vanity project, and when it went Windows, it ceased being of any interest to the people who could have helped make it succeed.
How does selling a "$100" device for $400 in any wah "push the industry downward"? If anything, it shows that there's a market for massively overpriced, over-hyped devices.
I love my iPhone. I bought one day-one and continue to own one and an iPad. They are truly amazing devices, and in my opinion, there are none better.
Aaaaand that's where you lost me. Beaten Wife Syndrome: if you keep going back for more, after a while you have to take some responsibility for enabling the whuppings.
When you are satisfying consumer demand, is it caving?
Depends on your point of view. From the point of view of their (ex) development community, most of whom walked away when they fastened on to the Microsoft's teat, yup, they caved like a nun bluffing on a pair of nines.
Slashdot Mirror
Great plan! Then the sharedholders can sue the board, and they can sue the producer, and he can sue the code and crayon monkeys! Lawyers can fix anything!
To be fair, they work pretty hard at it.
Does it matter? A free site, or no site. The significant factor in the decision (for many eyeballs) is a barrier to entry, not the availability of a free alternative.
Either way, the pay site has lost eyeballs and advertising revenue in return for nothing.
Data are just electrical impulses. All he was doing was sharing those impulses without the permission of the person that created them. Fight- I mean, share the power!
Well, I guess it's not exactly the same. Given the collaborative international nature of the effort, I can guarantee that it'll take five times as long to get going as Apollo, cost ten times as much (mostly in pork), and it'll be nobody's fault when it fails. Except maybe the French.
First, establish that some Invisible Sky Giant spoke anything to anyone, ever.
Once you've done that, we can argue over what language She used.
So, you're saying that the least that I can expect to earn the moment I graduate is the median (household!) income? So I'm above average after the first pay review?
You're not exactly putting me off lawyering as a career, buddy.
You must be lost - this is a thread about the privacy implications, not the effectiveness or cost. Perhaps you meant to piggyback your opinion somewhere else?
You know that when you step outside your door, other people can actually see you, right? Your Mak'tar stealth haze isn't working.
If you want to protect your privacy from prying eyes, you can wear a hoodie, burqa or that tiresome de rigueur V mask that all the cool paranoid kids are sporting, anywhere you like in public, without let or hindrance. The UK isn't France.
Being thrashed by sadists while you pucker up and gasp "Thank you sir, may I have another" is the best training for an entry level position in commercial games development.
Making the hack obvious before the "results" were in was exactly the wrong thing to do.
The right thing to do would have been to subvert the results, then mail the chosen numbers and other evidence that you'd owned the system to various news outlets just prior to the tally being announced. Let them embarrass themselves by claiming that the system worked and was secure.
Remember, the worst vulnerability is the one you never discover, or admit to.
That's nice, dear. And are you being investigated for distributing kiddie pr0n?
anon.penet.fi 4 life, homie.
The statute is a strict liability offence of failure to provide. It's very carefully worded so that the onus is on you to unencrypt. And no, you don't create any reasonable doubt by claiming that the disk actually contains 500GB of random data.
Unfortunately, it's failure to provide, not refusal to provide, and it's a strict liability offence. To save time, the next bullshit coulda-shoulda-woulda defence you'll suggest is that the disc is full of 500GB of random data, rather than password encrypted data. That fails the "beyond reasonable doubt" laugh test.
I was obliged (very briefly) to develop for that abomination, and it's like Penny Arcade read my mind and put it into comic form.
Uh... if China closed its ports tomorrow, who would blink first: them, or the rest of the world?
Up to now, China has been a most benign economic superpower, certainly far less abusive than Russia, the EU or the USA who engage in round-robin economic blackmail pretty much constantly.
If China ever start punching at their actual weight - for example, asking what exactly they can buy with the trillions of foreign currency that they're sitting on - then we'll all be they beeyatches.
Above the law? I am the lawyer!
Actually, I doubt there was a lawyer involved, since the first thing every corporate lawyer learns in the first week of the job is to say no to everything, always.
And it's exactly that "screw the developer community" attitude that killed XO-1 as an interesting platform.
Here's the crib notes: if you're going to ship a Windows device, you just order a million EEE PCs and sell them at cost, with a solar cell to charge the battery. Heck, you could ship Linux distros on them. XO-1 was always a vanity project, and when it went Windows, it ceased being of any interest to the people who could have helped make it succeed.
How does selling a "$100" device for $400 in any wah "push the industry downward"? If anything, it shows that there's a market for massively overpriced, over-hyped devices.
From the article:
Aaaaand that's where you lost me. Beaten Wife Syndrome: if you keep going back for more, after a while you have to take some responsibility for enabling the whuppings.
You mean like the "$100" XO-1, which you could obtain retail for the sum of $400? I wouldn't hold out for that $100 sweet spot if I were you.
Depends on your point of view. From the point of view of their (ex) development community, most of whom walked away when they fastened on to the Microsoft's teat, yup, they caved like a nun bluffing on a pair of nines.
Magic Palantír Says: DON'T COUNT ON IT
Happy birthday to you,
Happy birthday, dear Richard,
Happy bir- COPYRIGHT VIOLATION DETECTED - TRANSMISSION TERMINATED