I used to bicycle quite a bit and rode a motorcycle for about 4 years, I always watched for the most stupid thing a car could do and then assumed they would do just that. It saved me more than once. I always looked at it this way, it doesn't matter who is right and who is wrong in a bicycle/motorcycle accident with an automobile or truck, the bicycle/motorcyclist is always the loser.
I know if I was in the position to have someone check security, I would want a trusted person to do it. The problem is your not really trusted anywhere yet.
I would probably make up a really professional looking resume and a cover letter explaining your school and your situation. Offer to write a comprehensive report on the security situation in a business and send them out to every business you can think of that uses a computer. Maybe use the angle that a company could check on their current security company by having a different party do the testing.
The trick will be getting someone to let you do this when they don't really know you or what you would do with the information you get. Most security people aren't too happy about someone else coming in to check thier work, as that is insecure in itself. Best bet is to just ask as many places as you can think of and hope that one will let you do it.
Yes, but these guys tried to break into hundreds of thousands of homes and steal stuff. A little time for each offense adds up. Trying to compare someone stealing hundreds of thousands of credit cards to someone breaking in to one house is not a good analogy.
Yes, but this case would be more in line to catching the bank robber outside the bank with a drill and blowtorch trying to get into the safe from the outside. This person would still be charged with bank robbery.
"Anyone who was affected would just have to cancel the transactions when they spot them on their credit statements (which they should ALWAYS read)."
Just because the customer can cancel transactions doesn't mean that nobody pays for the crime, whether it's the credit card company or the store where the transactions were made someone has to cover the loss. The potential here was for hundreds of thousands of card numbers to be stolen. Even if no unauthorized purchases were made, there is an incredible cost to revoke and replace those cards.
While I agree that violent crimes should be punished more than non-violent crimes, it is still a crime to break into someones home when nobody is there and steal stuff isn't it? This was on par with trying to rob a bank of millions of dollars. If 3 17 year olds break into a bank and rob it, should they be punished less than a 40 year old professional criminal because they are kids and will "likely" be deterred from doing another crime?
There will always be a need for Legacy-based skills, but for the love of $deity don't hold onto old tech that you think "Well it used to be good enough!".
But if it is still good enough, why change? Rewriting large apps will introduce new bugs and problems. I work at a company that writes programs in COBOL. It might be nice to my resume to redo everything whatever the flavor of the month language is, but why? Our apps work great and our customers really like them.
I like how people think Bush is the one that "stirred the pot" and "made" Osama do 9/11 and forget he bombed the trade centers and the USS Cole while Clinton was President. He would have done 9/11 regardless of who was President and he will continue to do what he does regardless of who is President. If you think terrorism would have gone away if Kerry was elected you are wrong.
To add to this, we took our 2 year old son with us and were advised not to take him in with us because if he accidentally (well for a 2 year old on purpose) hit the big green button that looks just like a childs toy, our vote is counted as it stood and could not be redone. I don't think there is anywhere where you vote and after the fact get a "confirmation" you can then dispute and "revote" especially with an electronic vote.
I'm from Ohio, voted in Columbus. I went in and the lights came on and the screen lit up. It wasn't really a touchscreen, more like a touchpad with a cover on it. Red lights were flashing above each race (congressman, president, local issues, etc.), when you pressed to vote for a particular person or issue, the light quit flashing above it and a red light beside the person stayed lit. When you were finished, you hit a big green button below to process your vote and all lights went off. That was it. Most people in Ohio are still using cards and a number 2 pencil.
The funny thing about that story is that of all the articles I read about that, the only thing mentioned is thousands of votes found by "republican election observers" were found. Nobody ever said who the votes were for because in actuality, they were never there in the first place. You assume since they were republican observers that they were votes for Kerry (at least I am assuming that you are since you cite Kerry, but your source doesn't say one way or another), I heard people in the media assume that election observers had found votes for Bush (Howard Stern comes to mind). Since the votes were not really there, they were votes for nobody.
Most of the blue states are urban, and most of them only are able to live with food due to the charity of the red states which are where the majority of the agriculture occurs.
Easy to mix things around. We all contribute to society even if some are paid less for it.
I didn't realize electoral votes were allocated according to primary elections.
With the record turnout this election is having I think that no state is "guaranteed" other than the home state of the candidate, but then again that has been lost as well.
Undersexed nerds have gone from 20% of the users in 1997 to 5% today as more and more *regular* people can get computers and connected to the internet.
Our current favorite is drinking yahtzee. My vote is still in on drinking twister, but I don't think it will fly with them. And would a drinking game be considered non-zero-sum if there is plenty of beer and zero-sum if there is a limited supply?
He is not saying get rid of the OS, just it should be transparent. Yes it provides services and does it's job, but at this time it still gets in the way. People don't sit down at a computer to access devices and multi-task, that should not be a concern of theirs. It should happen but not visibly. People sit down at computers to process orders, or to communicate with someone, or to write that nasty fax to a problem supplier. They don't sit down at the computer to try to find the right button (where was it, the start menu, the system tray or the taskbar? I just saw it). They don't sit down to deal with wrong dll versions or incompatible hardware. The process of maintaining a computer should not enter the equation. Right now these are facts of life and not easily curable, but I think he is trying to say that this is the important stuff that needs to be focused on. (I know this is microsoft based, but it happens with most os's in one form or another)I think he is just saying that OS manufacturers instead of continually pushing "new integrated features" should focus on making themselves as invisible to the user as possible.
This is what really aggrevates me with these patents, this one and "one-click" selling. The patent law states as follows:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Why do all of these seemingly "obvious" patents make it past this requirement. In Amazon's case, it's not like anyone saw this and said "jeez I wish I would have thought of that!", it is a natural progression to some kind of one-click buying and it seems like this is the same case here. Not to mention all the prior art that everyone esle is coming up with.
I think anyone arguing this really understands that this is NOT a problem to record companies and musicians today. It will be a problem 10 years from now when iso copies are considered small and download in seconds and cd burners burn at 100x. Then it will be a problem. Record companies cannot set a precedent now of allowing people to share music because it will then not be enforcable 10 years from now.
The real problem with MP3.com was that they were making money (or attempting to) from someone else's work without permission. While you as a purchaser of a cd IMHO have the right to copy to other mediums of your choice for your own use, MP3.com did not have the right to use copyritten material in a way as to make a profit from it without in some way making some profit available to the artist.
The book and software analogies are not quite the same as this case. Sure, you could copy a book or software and give it to someone, but that has it's limits. You can only make so many copies, so going after one person doesn't make much sense. Now if you started copying hundreds of copys and giving them away, chances are you would have at least been taken to court. But no one would do that because of the expense involved in copying so many books. Same thing with copying software on disks. Now however, Napster and ftp lets you give to potentially millions of people. At no cost to you. That is a huge difference. The fact that you are getting a lesser quality copy may have impact now, most people if they like the music will buy the cd, but someday you will be able to upload/download identical copys in seconds. That is why record companies are compelled to act now.
--They simply need to make it easier for consumers to buy music/video than to copy it.
It won't be possible if you can download in seconds and burn just as fast.
Slashdot Mirror
I used to bicycle quite a bit and rode a motorcycle for about 4 years, I always watched for the most stupid thing a car could do and then assumed they would do just that. It saved me more than once. I always looked at it this way, it doesn't matter who is right and who is wrong in a bicycle/motorcycle accident with an automobile or truck, the bicycle/motorcyclist is always the loser.
I know if I was in the position to have someone check security, I would want a trusted person to do it. The problem is your not really trusted anywhere yet.
I would probably make up a really professional looking resume and a cover letter explaining your school and your situation. Offer to write a comprehensive report on the security situation in a business and send them out to every business you can think of that uses a computer. Maybe use the angle that a company could check on their current security company by having a different party do the testing.
The trick will be getting someone to let you do this when they don't really know you or what you would do with the information you get. Most security people aren't too happy about someone else coming in to check thier work, as that is insecure in itself. Best bet is to just ask as many places as you can think of and hope that one will let you do it.
a. ATM receipts do not have your complete number on them. No reciepts I have gotten in the last 5 years from any business hass.
b. Give me your cc #, ssn, birthdate, mothers maiden name and your address. I won't use them, I promise.
If you rob a bank, usually, you go in there with a piece of paper.
Yes, but these guys tried to break into hundreds of thousands of homes and steal stuff. A little time for each offense adds up. Trying to compare someone stealing hundreds of thousands of credit cards to someone breaking in to one house is not a good analogy.
Yes, but this case would be more in line to catching the bank robber outside the bank with a drill and blowtorch trying to get into the safe from the outside. This person would still be charged with bank robbery.
"Anyone who was affected would just have to cancel the transactions when they spot them on their credit statements (which they should ALWAYS read)."
Just because the customer can cancel transactions doesn't mean that nobody pays for the crime, whether it's the credit card company or the store where the transactions were made someone has to cover the loss. The potential here was for hundreds of thousands of card numbers to be stolen. Even if no unauthorized purchases were made, there is an incredible cost to revoke and replace those cards.
While I agree that violent crimes should be punished more than non-violent crimes, it is still a crime to break into someones home when nobody is there and steal stuff isn't it? This was on par with trying to rob a bank of millions of dollars. If 3 17 year olds break into a bank and rob it, should they be punished less than a 40 year old professional criminal because they are kids and will "likely" be deterred from doing another crime?
There will always be a need for Legacy-based skills, but for the love of $deity don't hold onto old tech that you think "Well it used to be good enough!" .
But if it is still good enough, why change? Rewriting large apps will introduce new bugs and problems. I work at a company that writes programs in COBOL. It might be nice to my resume to redo everything whatever the flavor of the month language is, but why? Our apps work great and our customers really like them.
Hack into Microsoft and download some source code. See how fast you are arrested for theft.
I like how people think Bush is the one that "stirred the pot" and "made" Osama do 9/11 and forget he bombed the trade centers and the USS Cole while Clinton was President. He would have done 9/11 regardless of who was President and he will continue to do what he does regardless of who is President. If you think terrorism would have gone away if Kerry was elected you are wrong.
To add to this, we took our 2 year old son with us and were advised not to take him in with us because if he accidentally (well for a 2 year old on purpose) hit the big green button that looks just like a childs toy, our vote is counted as it stood and could not be redone. I don't think there is anywhere where you vote and after the fact get a "confirmation" you can then dispute and "revote" especially with an electronic vote.
I'm from Ohio, voted in Columbus. I went in and the lights came on and the screen lit up. It wasn't really a touchscreen, more like a touchpad with a cover on it. Red lights were flashing above each race (congressman, president, local issues, etc.), when you pressed to vote for a particular person or issue, the light quit flashing above it and a red light beside the person stayed lit. When you were finished, you hit a big green button below to process your vote and all lights went off. That was it. Most people in Ohio are still using cards and a number 2 pencil.
The funny thing about that story is that of all the articles I read about that, the only thing mentioned is thousands of votes found by "republican election observers" were found. Nobody ever said who the votes were for because in actuality, they were never there in the first place. You assume since they were republican observers that they were votes for Kerry (at least I am assuming that you are since you cite Kerry, but your source doesn't say one way or another), I heard people in the media assume that election observers had found votes for Bush (Howard Stern comes to mind). Since the votes were not really there, they were votes for nobody.
Ok, right now I am imagining people from as far away as Indiana hopping in their cars right now for a road trip.
Give us 50 or 100 years and we may be arguing if code has a "soul" or not.
Most of the blue states are urban, and most of them only are able to live with food due to the charity of the red states which are where the majority of the agriculture occurs.
Easy to mix things around. We all contribute to society even if some are paid less for it.
I waited about 2 hours at 6:40 am. Lots of people voting, no challengers that I saw.
I didn't realize electoral votes were allocated according to primary elections.
:)
With the record turnout this election is having I think that no state is "guaranteed" other than the home state of the candidate, but then again that has been lost as well.
But I do agree with your sig
Undersexed nerds have gone from 20% of the users in 1997 to 5% today as more and more *regular* people can get computers and connected to the internet.
Our current favorite is drinking yahtzee. My vote is still in on drinking twister, but I don't think it will fly with them. And would a drinking game be considered non-zero-sum if there is plenty of beer and zero-sum if there is a limited supply?
He is not saying get rid of the OS, just it should be transparent. Yes it provides services and does it's job, but at this time it still gets in the way. People don't sit down at a computer to access devices and multi-task, that should not be a concern of theirs. It should happen but not visibly. People sit down at computers to process orders, or to communicate with someone, or to write that nasty fax to a problem supplier. They don't sit down at the computer to try to find the right button (where was it, the start menu, the system tray or the taskbar? I just saw it). They don't sit down to deal with wrong dll versions or incompatible hardware. The process of maintaining a computer should not enter the equation. Right now these are facts of life and not easily curable, but I think he is trying to say that this is the important stuff that needs to be focused on. (I know this is microsoft based, but it happens with most os's in one form or another)I think he is just saying that OS manufacturers instead of continually pushing "new integrated features" should focus on making themselves as invisible to the user as possible.
This is what really aggrevates me with these patents, this one and "one-click" selling. The patent law states as follows:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Why do all of these seemingly "obvious" patents make it past this requirement. In Amazon's case, it's not like anyone saw this and said "jeez I wish I would have thought of that!", it is a natural progression to some kind of one-click buying and it seems like this is the same case here. Not to mention all the prior art that everyone esle is coming up with.
I think anyone arguing this really understands that this is NOT a problem to record companies and musicians today. It will be a problem 10 years from now when iso copies are considered small and download in seconds and cd burners burn at 100x. Then it will be a problem. Record companies cannot set a precedent now of allowing people to share music because it will then not be enforcable 10 years from now.
The real problem with MP3.com was that they were making money (or attempting to) from someone else's work without permission. While you as a purchaser of a cd IMHO have the right to copy to other mediums of your choice for your own use, MP3.com did not have the right to use copyritten material in a way as to make a profit from it without in some way making some profit available to the artist.
The book and software analogies are not quite the same as this case. Sure, you could copy a book or software and give it to someone, but that has it's limits. You can only make so many copies, so going after one person doesn't make much sense. Now if you started copying hundreds of copys and giving them away, chances are you would have at least been taken to court. But no one would do that because of the expense involved in copying so many books. Same thing with copying software on disks. Now however, Napster and ftp lets you give to potentially millions of people. At no cost to you. That is a huge difference. The fact that you are getting a lesser quality copy may have impact now, most people if they like the music will buy the cd, but someday you will be able to upload/download identical copys in seconds. That is why record companies are compelled to act now.
--They simply need to make it easier for consumers to buy music/video than to copy it.
It won't be possible if you can download in seconds and burn just as fast.