Small point, Michael's "note on their backgrounds" aren't neccesarily intended to be a rap-sheet of evil-doing. For example the notes on the children's web advertising seem neither for nor against privacy. Same with running PlanetOut . Advertisers, PR folks and lawers aren't always pure evil and I don't think that the story states otherwise.
I do agree that saying that the TRUSTe chick won't bust DoubleClick is unfair, and it would have been better to just point out the potential conflict of interest.
I also think that it's unfair to assume that the former attorney general will lobby for DoubleClick, but it's not unfair to point out that he is in a good position to lobby for them is he wanted to.
Which raises the question: how much (if anything) are these guys payed?
Just for the sake of argument: You could argue that since there is significant public opinion against advertisers, PR folks and lawers, that mentioning someone's profession in a bio would vilify them, kinda like bringing up someone's race or sexual orientation. Since in this case, occupation is a crieterion for selection and relevent to ones qualifications, as opposed to an irrelevant descriptive detail, that argument probably dosen't hold water. But I can think of a few counter examples, if a Phd canidate in public policy was supporting herself by stripping then descrbing her as a stripper and neglecting to mention the academic work would be deliberately misleading.
Biased, yes, paranoid, not neccesarily. (and editorials are by their very nature, biased)
It is difficult, if not impossible, to prove beyond any shadow of a doubt what someone's intentions are, and some of Michael's guesses are (as I imagine he'd agree) just guesses. This is especially difficult when dealing w/ astro-turfers and PR typess who *never* get to the point! But all anyone can really do when they see a corporate action that "smells-fishy" is try to raise suspicions and awareness, and start a dialog, asking pointed questions. IMHO, Michael's story does make a case for public scrutiny of DoubleClick within the limits of a one or two page post. The act of posting a story on slashdot is logically equivalent to suggesting that people discuss the issue and present thier own evidence/arguments/research.
Michael's point is that this board is being presented as one advocating for consumer privacy(a), while being wieghted with people who have an anti-privacy slant(b) and without containing any representatives of any of the established (with large member bases) grassroots consumer groups that regularly address privacy issues(c), and therefore the DoubleClick's sincerity is questionable.
(a) We could all decide for ourselves if the linked press release give the impression that this is all about protecting consumer privacy, if the site wasn't slashdotted (or maybe I munged resolution of the double click domain:p anyone have an IP?).
(b) There are 8 board members that we know about. I will be up front about my personal bias agains lawers and PR people:). Of these Stewart Baker seems to be very anti internet privacy and 3 (Robert Litan, Harriet Pearson, Lori Fena)seem to be against strong privacy legislation. Of the remaining 4 (Robert Abrams, Daniel Weitzner, Elizabeth Lascoutx, David Stazer) I don't see any obvoius strong privacy advocates. I'll elaborate below (see the ***)
(c)The CDT, EPIC, EFF CME or ACLU have no representatives on this board.
RealityMaster - Bear in mind that no one said anything about DoubleClick or their board being "evil" or never having anything valid to say. Although their honesty, sencerity and commitment to privacy is certianly called into question. I fail to see how putting words in people's mouths can foster a healthy debate. You may want to and ask yourself why this story raised so much of your ire (calling it "Knee-jerk" and "immature" and such).
BTW... there are many people who love to feel supeirior when dismissing someone's concerns as "crack-pot conpiracy theories" without acutally presenting any sound evidence or arguments to the contrary. It's an easy way to feel smart and clever, I guess. But we would all do well to remember that in the overwheming majority news media, we only see a very narrow range of opinions, and that anything outside of that scope is immidiately dismissed as totally nuts. Some notable examples include the news coverage of "eco-terrorists", "femi-nazis", "milita-men" and "hackers". You may want to read some Noam Chomski for some insights on the media or read "Toxic Sludge Is Good for You" which covers the PR industry and astroturfing.
-bridgette
*** DETAILS *** Robert Abrams, while his connections could prove valuble if he agrees w/ Double Click, we don't know if he does.
Robert Litan - In the linked speech he is lobbying against having a legal opt-in requiremet (so you aren't tracked by default) and against having opt-outs for use/transfer of personal data anything other than marketing purposes (why - what else do they want to do?). He provides the most irrelevent reasons supporting these views - i.e. limiting credit reporting and fraud detection will raise interst rates (nevermind that no one is proposing this) and opt-in will make marketing more expensive and cause general inflation(!) Most of his work is in the area of federal economic regulations and economic globablization. But he has published a book and lobbied congress with the thiesis that an EU privacy law was detrimental to trade.
Harriet Pearson - Online Privacy Alliance is into voluntary corporate self regulation. This sounds really nice until you note that they didn't start work till 1998 when on-line privacy legislation was already frequently introduced to congress. Are they trying to protect consumer privacy (as claimed in their mission statement) or trying to promote voluntary self-regulation as a means of avoiding manditory federeal regulation? Perhaps I should start a group that advocates voluntary self-regulated abstinance from mind altering substances so the government need not add any new chemicals to the regulated substances list! If I had thought of this in 1982, maybe we'd all be wearing big "I don't do ectacy" buttons:)
With known privacy violators like DoubleClick, Intel, Microsoft, Real Netwoks and Yahoo on the roster, it obviously dosen't require it's membership to live up to it's pledge. The member groups incude the MPAA and the Direct Marketing Association but not the CDT, EPIC, EFF CME or ACLU.
Lori Fena - The chairman of Web TrustE has a strong incentive oppose govenment privacy regulation, since a policy like that of the EU would make her company irrelevent. And TRUSTe is a member of Online Privacy Alliance.
Daniel Weitzner, the P3P thing could lead to a reduction of privacy, but I don't know enough to be sure. Although it seems like something that just automatically filled out forms for you, at your request (like in IE), would be more useful and flexable and far less risky.
Elizabeth Lascoutx, her only work listed has nothing to do with privacy. If you have counter examples, do share.
David Stazer, his only work listed has nothing to do with privacy. Again, if you have counter examples, do share.
Stewart Baker, while verifying the claim about PIII ID I found some other info. He seems IMHO to have been pro-clipperchip, pro-gov-key-escrow, defensive of past govenment wiretap warrents and claimed that he was only against the regulations against strong crypto-export because such laws were uneforceable.
Under normal circumstances, the author of published document has the copyright. But in this case the published document is also supposed to be a trade secret. Since these are mutually exclusive, M$ may have (unknowingly - i guess the legal dept. is a bit overworked right now:) *invalidateed* the copyright when they claimed that the document is a trade secret.
Moreover, as many posters have pointed out, fair use of a technical specification may allow for reproduction in full.
Throw enough lawers at a situation and nothing remains simple and clear-cut.
My understanding is that certain versions of outlook with certain confiiguations will run the vb script when viewing the email text (either in a sperate window or in the preview pane).
Note that no one is saying that this happens with all versions and all configuations, so it isn't sufficient to provide one counter-example (i.e. "it didn't auto exceute on my system - so there!").
Russ published a chart showing outlooks behavior when you open or preview email. Note that in Outlook 98 and Outlook Express, when previewing email, active content is executed if the secutity zone allows. http://www.ntbugtraq.com/default.asp?sid=1&pid=4 7&aid=56
So Outlook will auto execute scripts iff active scripting is allowed by whatever zone Outlook is using.
Outlook defaults to using the internet zone and I doubt(hope) that active scripting is enabled by default for that zone, but is is likely that many IE users would enable active scripting at some point, since may sites, incluiding MS's IE update, require it.
And I have to say that I think RIAA is definately not amonopoly, especially these days when musicians really do have a viablealternative to using the RIAA member record companies: The Internet, and also a ton of indy labels.
Don't forget about distribution!
There are a handful of major record labels and a handful of distrbutors and they pretty much work in exclusive partnerships. Often the label owns the distributor oughtright. I've never heard of an indie label working with a major distributor. Major retail outlets are rarely willing to deal with anyone but the major distributors (caroline, is the only 'indie' distributor of significant size).
So, you can't access the retailers w/out the distributor and you can't access the distributor without the record company. If it were one record company and one distributor it would clearly be a case of abuse of monopoly power. But because it is a small group of comanies, algededly acting in collusion, it's a bit harder to procecute.
The movies are kinda similar, indie films often collect dust after filming and editing because they can't get a distribution deal.
You have choices, but not if you want to sell a million albums. Granted, you'd make more money selling in the ten's/hundred's of thousands with a small label, but you can't do millions w/o paying the major labels their 95-98%. I hope that as more people work outside of the established system, equitable, open channels will develop. If the indie market gets strong enough it would limit the ablility of the MPAA to play format-switch. I'd hate spending my old age stuck w/ nothing but the britney-bot-5000 because I can't get a player for any of my lp's, cd's or mp3's.
Thanks for the accurate concise information! Most people here appreciate expert analysis (even though *some* posters seem to prefer playing 'bash all lawers').
IIRC, the notice about posters owning their comments came after some news site reproduced slashdot posts in their entirety. The news site did this in a very unflattering way, picking the most violent flames to demonstrate that the geek community is totally irrational. I wish I could remember the news site's name or the aprozimate date:(
At the time, everyone (including Rob Cmmdr. et. al.) was really pissed off about the unauthorized reproduction, so the current controversy shouldn't come as a shock. It's a bit hypocritical to say that CNN can't reproduce post in their entirety, but Andover can. Since this site depends in part on trust from community, the staff would be wise to ensure that this issue is addressed.
Does anmyone else remember this? Or am I totally confused?
I really enjoyed your post and agree wholeheartly with it, except for one small point:
Oh, really? I don't see particularly much community-oriented activity taking place at most libraries. I don't see that as the purpose of a library at all. To me, a library is an almost sacred place, a "temple of knowledge" if you will. I've been to many libraries over the course of my life, and I've never felt any less lonely than when reading in front of a computer screen.
While the The Library of Congress and many university libraries aren't cornerstones in their communities, your basic, run-of-the-mill neighborhood library does perform some vital social functions, over and above providing books and research assistance.
Some examples are : free computer and internet access, free meeting rooms for local non-profit groups, literacy programs, childrens programs (like readings in the children's sections), memberships to museums, zoos etc. (check out the pass for free admission), a place for retirees to read the paper and socialize, a clean, quiet place for kids to do thier homework, places for the homeless to get out of the cold, local announcement boards. I imagine that a librarian (or anyone who uses thier local library a lot), could come up with a longer list.
One could argue that these functions are not a library's job, but they do need to be done, and libraries are picking up the slack. Unfortuntely, people who could/would benefit form these well-rounded libraries don't know about the great stuff that's available. And what's even more unfortunate, local libraries do lose funding and end up cutting back on hours and services.
However, for a librarian to avoid giving a wider distibition of information, in a lame attmept to defend library budgets, is pathetic and shameful. Fortunately, most librarians are very enthusiastic about the great possibilities for using computers to distribute information.
the LoC's resources are contrained. if they spend 20% of their money, time, space, on digitizing existing content, they would have 20% fewer resources to apply to the first two priorities..
But his objections weren't resouce or prioritzation issues. His only objections to digitizing books (in the article) centered around his finding books more asthetically pleasing and sacred than electronic media and his reluctance to endager the role of libraries in The Community. The one resource issue he mentioned, digitizing the fragile and less-accessable items first, makes perfect sense and hasn't been flamed in this forum.
The bottom line is that he was hired to accumulate and maintain works and to distibute them, to the best of his ability, to congress, the govenment and the nation. He was not hired to evangelize books as The One True Media or to encourage socially healthy behavior (i.e. discouraging internet research if he feels that going to the library in person is better for us),.
I am very careful about it, only OCing in situations that will give me significantly better performance and price without sacrificing stability. (dual celery 366@550!)
If you research your project well, you can build a great machine at a great price. And you can design your system to emphasize your needs.
There probably aren't a lot of female over clockers simply because there aren't a lot of female geeks (or Quake players). I think that there will be more non-geeks doing the over-clocking thing in the future, since more non-geeks have computers and end up doing the maintenance (I even coached my mom, over the phone, while upgrading her modem!)
DYI computer modifications will be much more common than car hot-rodding since building your own pc consists of so many small, common and accessble steps. Most computer owners will at some point be encouraged to install their own memory upgrade or a second disk drive or a new modem etc.... after doing those things enough, you know about everything but installing the motherboard. And computer work dosn't have the same space and tool requirements of auto mechanics.
I do wonder about the correlation of gender and hobby choices. I know a lot of guys who tinker with cars or build things out of wood or brew beer and I know a lot of chicks who love to sew or throw pots or do beadwork or make candles. But why does it work out that way? Even with very non-traditional people who don't easily fit into perscribed gener roles?
Is it illegal to LINK to material that is deemed 'unworthy' under our laws? To use a gun metaphor (which will probably start a flame war).. it's legal to sell a gun, or a knife, etc. in the US.. it's just illegal to use them to harm somebody else. In this case, 2600.com isn't even PROVIDING the materials.. it just tells people where they can be obtained. Can I be sued for telling you where a gunstore is?
Probably not, because the guns in gunstores generally aren't illegal. Telling someone where to get an illegal gun, if you know or should have known that your information would lead to an illegal gun sale probably is a criminal offence. In general, the act of aiding criminal activity is criminal.
To use an analogy from another rabid, politcal, over-the-top area of law enforcement, if Alice asks Bob where to buy cocaine and Bob tells her to go to Cathy and Cathy really is a coke dealer, then Alice has committed a crime (unless maybe if Bob was an investigative reporter or a cop and Alice was providing the information under the understanding that Bob wasn't actually looking to buy coke).
One benefit of breaking up M$ into seperate OS, Apps and (maybe?) Compiler companies is that the market (and the SEC?) would provide very strict oversite of buisiness practices. It would be very difficult for one company to take a disadvantagous position in order to further the interests of another company without the financal analysts having fits.
For example, if the application company decided to give a new application away for free as MS did with IE, they'd have to have some really compelling financial reason or else the sockholders would bail.
Also, if there were seperate OS, Compiler/DevTools and Application companies, the application company would actually have to turn a profit.
Personally, I'd like to see at least 2 of the companies be "OS" and "Windowing System":)
30 years ago people didn't put most of their retirement money into stocks. Your pension/401K/etc. would have been put in t-bills and bank notes (like HQ CDs) and maybe *some* HQ bonds. After all, mutual funds are a recent invention that didn't get popular till the 80's and retirees old enough to remember the depression aren't too keen on investing what they can't afford to loose in the market.
Well, at least, this is how it was explained to me, having never seen a bear market, I doubt I'm capable of totally beliveing it:)
Is it just me or do some of those stories sound a bit confused?
Microsoft said for the first time that it would allow computer makers to modify the blueprints to all current and future versions of its Windows software to embed the technology of Microsoft competitors. (ABC)
The Wall Street Journal reported that Microsoft's offer included allowing computer makers to modify the blueprints to all current and future versions of its Windows software to embed competitors' technologies. (CBS)
But only if is there any way to make it state or county prison... perhaps in a capitalist robber-barron shot of irony - a privatized state prison?
The other reply to your message reminded me that I know someone who was in federal prison with Michael Milikin. When asked how Mr. Milikin was dealing with jail, he said "Oh, federal prison is pretty mellow, it' state prison that you really want to avoid."
Not like they wouldn't pay off some of their fellow inmates for protection anyway, ala Papillion...
I have serious doubts about any company that uses headhunters to find fresh graduates. After all, they can interface directly with the univerity career centers and not have to pay 30-100% of a years salary in commission. Because of the prohibative cost, most places will only use headhunters when they are having trouble finding the right person. When the pool of potentially qualified people is extremly small (CEO, expert in some really specific area, etc.) this is quite understandable. When the pool is really large (anyone with a BS in X) this seems very odd.
IMHO, the best plan is to use any resorces that your school has to offer (a lot of places even do on campus interviews), read _What_Color_Is_Your_Parachute_?_ and research companies and their openings on their homepages.
Of course, if a company has the size and the cluefulness, they try to grow and train the team in such a way as to avoid "suddenly needing an expert" and being over a barrel since this will often cost $100+ per hour.
Form the PHB perspective, sometimes you want to grow your development team for the future and you don't have any immediate need for skills that aren't currently coved by the existing team. So you find someone who is generally good (smart, problem solver, quick learner, hard worker, good communication, plays well w/ others etc.) and the past experience need not be a perfect match to some skill list.
OTOH, sometimes you desperately need someone who is an *expert* in some specifc thing and you don't have time to wait for someone already on your team to gain expertice (i.e. your database guru with an MS and 10 years experince just quit and the jr. database guys are good but they aren't gonna aquire 10 years Oracle kung foo in 6 months).
Most situations probably fall somewhere between these 2 extremes.
Of course, if a company has the size and the cluefulness, they try to
While dealing with clueless HR is annoying ("says here you've used HPUX, Solaris and RedHat, but do you have UNIX experience, I really need someone with UNIX experience" True Story!), in some situations the job description is narrow for a good reason.
Additionally, it's good to bear in mind that job listings are brodcast further and further over time (company corkboard -> newspaper) and the signal to noise ratio increases accordingly so a response to newspaper ad is gonna be screened more anally than a response to a personal recomendation. How would anyone deal with 500+ resumes? _What_Color_Is_Your_Parachute_?_ covers this angle well and is a good resouce for anyone who is job hunting.
Just a warning, Lego Datca used to be for educators only and is still sold primarily through educational resellers (unlike Lego Technics). These resellers vary in their willingness to sell to non-educators. Quite annoying.
Taylor equates this situation to one in which soft-drink giant Coca-Cola might be required to release its recipe for others to use.
No, but it is equivalent to allowing anyone to hire chemical engeineers to figure out the formula. And I believe that this is perfectly legal. In fact, it's the basis for the Designer Imposters perfume line (assuming all liquids are entitled to equal protection under the law).
I believe that they are obligated to disclose the list of companies that recieved your credit report.. if you ask. If you get your credit report, there are usually 2 sections on who has seen your report. The first lists credit inquiries that you initiated - like when you apply for credit or a job. The second lists companies that made inquieries that weren't initiated by you - genreally companies that want to pre-screen you for a credit offer, the source of all those pre-approved credit card mailings.
Note that it is still legal and standard practice by all of the credit reporting agencies, to sell/give your credit report info to companies that are using the info to offer you credit, even if you didn't ask them to. The ruling in this article only applies to companies that aren't trying to offer credit. So citibank can do an unsolicited credit check because they might want to offer you a 'pre-approved' platinum card (they are never really pre-approved, they reserve the right to reject you) but Carnival can't do an unsolicited credit check to check to see if you can afford a cruise before they call you.
Also, you can opt out! You have to write or call each credit agency seperately and request that they not give out unsolicited information. It's kind of a pain because you have to renew your request every 2 years and I believe that they require a seperate form if you want to be removed from all existing lists immediately.
People who don't make an effort at choosing a college generally go to one they've already heard of, usually a nearby school (of all the graduates from a given HS that attend college, it's not unusual for 90% of those attend the same college (or one of 2-3 colleges)) .
However, if I were shopping for a college, I would give their website a thorough look, since you can see a lot of really great stuff: course materials, office hours, reading lists, etc.
And I would be very leary of a school that appered to have no web page (but for a CS school that would be pretty sad).
But I doubt that there are many good schools that can't find enough qualified students each year. They just like to have lots of applications because: 1) With more apps to choose from, they might get 'better' students. 2) One common measure of a schools worth (I said common, not fair or accurate) is how many applicatins they get per open slot. 3) They get 30-50 bucks per undergad application , 50-100 for grad and up to 200 per app for med school! KA-CHING!
The pipe would have to have at least *some* drug residue to be consiered paraphenelia. An unused pipe, roach clip or bong is perfectly legal if it is unsed, since you can't prove that it was used for or will be used for illegal activity. This is why you can purchase such items, out in the open, at stores, as long as you don't state illegal intent. "You have a lovely selection of tobacco pipes, may I see that 4 foot glass water pipe?" Of course, some of the "plausible" alternate uses for bongs and roach clips are comical at best...
Slashdot Mirror
Small point, Michael's "note on their backgrounds" aren't neccesarily intended to be a rap-sheet of evil-doing. For example the notes on the children's web advertising seem neither for nor against privacy. Same with running PlanetOut . Advertisers, PR folks and lawers aren't always pure evil and I don't think that the story states otherwise.
I do agree that saying that the TRUSTe chick won't bust DoubleClick is unfair, and it would have been better to just point out the potential conflict of interest.
I also think that it's unfair to assume that the former attorney general will lobby for DoubleClick, but it's not unfair to point out that he is in a good position to lobby for them is he wanted to.
Which raises the question: how much (if anything) are these guys payed?
Just for the sake of argument: You could argue that since there is significant public opinion against advertisers, PR folks and lawers, that mentioning someone's profession in a bio would vilify them, kinda like bringing up someone's race or sexual orientation. Since in this case, occupation is a crieterion for selection and relevent to ones qualifications, as opposed to an irrelevant descriptive detail, that argument probably dosen't hold water. But I can think of a few counter examples, if a Phd canidate in public policy was supporting herself by stripping then descrbing her as a stripper and neglecting to mention the academic work would be deliberately misleading.
Biased, yes, paranoid, not neccesarily. (and editorials are by their very nature, biased)
:p anyone have an IP?).
:). Of these Stewart Baker seems to be very anti internet privacy and 3 (Robert Litan, Harriet Pearson, Lori Fena)seem to be against strong privacy legislation. Of the remaining 4 (Robert Abrams, Daniel Weitzner, Elizabeth Lascoutx, David Stazer) I don't see any obvoius strong privacy advocates. I'll elaborate below (see the ***)
... there are many people who love to feel supeirior when dismissing someone's concerns as "crack-pot conpiracy theories" without acutally presenting any sound evidence or arguments to the contrary. It's an easy way to feel smart and clever, I guess. But we would all do well to remember that in the overwheming majority news media, we only see a very narrow range of opinions, and that anything outside of that scope is immidiately dismissed as totally nuts. Some notable examples include the news coverage of "eco-terrorists", "femi-nazis", "milita-men" and "hackers". You may want to read some Noam Chomski for some insights on the media or read "Toxic Sludge Is Good for You" which covers the PR industry and astroturfing.
:)
It is difficult, if not impossible, to prove beyond any shadow of a doubt what someone's intentions are, and some of Michael's guesses are (as I imagine he'd agree) just guesses. This is especially difficult when dealing w/ astro-turfers and PR typess who *never* get to the point! But all anyone can really do when they see a corporate action that "smells-fishy" is try to raise suspicions and awareness, and start a dialog, asking pointed questions. IMHO, Michael's story does make a case for public scrutiny of DoubleClick within the limits of a one or two page post. The act of posting a story on slashdot is logically equivalent to suggesting that people discuss the issue and present thier own evidence/arguments/research.
Michael's point is that this board is being presented as one advocating for consumer privacy(a), while being wieghted with people who have an anti-privacy slant(b) and without containing any representatives of any of the established (with large member bases) grassroots consumer groups that regularly address privacy issues(c), and therefore the DoubleClick's sincerity is questionable.
(a) We could all decide for ourselves if the linked press release give the impression that this is all about protecting consumer privacy, if the site wasn't slashdotted (or maybe I munged resolution of the double click domain
(b) There are 8 board members that we know about. I will be up front about my personal bias agains lawers and PR people
(c)The CDT, EPIC, EFF CME or ACLU have no representatives on this board.
RealityMaster - Bear in mind that no one said anything about DoubleClick or their board being "evil" or never having anything valid to say. Although their honesty, sencerity and commitment to privacy is certianly called into question. I fail to see how putting words in people's mouths can foster a healthy debate. You may want to and ask yourself why this story raised so much of your ire (calling it "Knee-jerk" and "immature" and such).
BTW
-bridgette
*** DETAILS ***
Robert Abrams, while his connections could prove valuble if he agrees w/ Double Click, we don't know if he does.
Robert Litan - In the linked speech he is lobbying against having a legal opt-in requiremet (so you aren't tracked by default) and against having opt-outs for use/transfer of personal data anything other than marketing purposes (why - what else do they want to do?). He provides the most irrelevent reasons supporting these views - i.e. limiting credit reporting and fraud detection will raise interst rates (nevermind that no one is proposing this) and opt-in will make marketing more expensive and cause general inflation(!) Most of his work is in the area of federal economic regulations and economic globablization. But he has published a book and lobbied congress with the thiesis that an EU privacy law was detrimental to trade.
Harriet Pearson - Online Privacy Alliance is into voluntary corporate self regulation. This sounds really nice until you note that they didn't start work till 1998 when on-line privacy legislation was already frequently introduced to congress. Are they trying to protect consumer privacy (as claimed in their mission statement) or trying to promote voluntary self-regulation as a means of avoiding manditory federeal regulation? Perhaps I should start a group that advocates voluntary self-regulated abstinance from mind altering substances so the government need not add any new chemicals to the regulated substances list! If I had thought of this in 1982, maybe we'd all be wearing big "I don't do ectacy" buttons
With known privacy violators like DoubleClick, Intel, Microsoft, Real Netwoks and Yahoo on the roster, it obviously dosen't require it's membership to live up to it's pledge. The member groups incude the MPAA and the Direct Marketing Association but not the CDT, EPIC, EFF CME or ACLU.
Lori Fena - The chairman of Web TrustE has a strong incentive oppose govenment privacy regulation, since a policy like that of the EU would make her company irrelevent. And TRUSTe is a member of Online Privacy Alliance.
Daniel Weitzner, the P3P thing could lead to a reduction of privacy, but I don't know enough to be sure. Although it seems like something that just automatically filled out forms for you, at your request (like in IE), would be more useful and flexable and far less risky.
Elizabeth Lascoutx, her only work listed has nothing to do with privacy. If you have counter examples, do share.
David Stazer, his only work listed has nothing to do with privacy. Again, if you have counter examples, do share.
Stewart Baker, while verifying the claim about PIII ID I found some other info. He seems IMHO to have been pro-clipperchip, pro-gov-key-escrow, defensive of past govenment wiretap warrents and claimed that he was only against the regulations against strong crypto-export because such laws were uneforceable.
Under normal circumstances, the author of published document has the copyright. But in this case the published document is also supposed to be a trade secret. Since these are mutually exclusive, M$ may have (unknowingly - i guess the legal dept. is a bit overworked right now :) *invalidateed* the copyright when they claimed that the document is a trade secret.
Moreover, as many posters have pointed out, fair use of a technical specification may allow for reproduction in full.
Throw enough lawers at a situation and nothing remains simple and clear-cut.
My understanding is that certain versions of outlook with certain confiiguations will run the vb script when viewing the email text (either in a sperate window or in the preview pane).
4 7&aid=56
Note that no one is saying that this happens with all versions and all configuations, so it isn't sufficient to provide one counter-example (i.e. "it didn't auto exceute on my system - so there!").
Russ published a chart showing outlooks behavior when you open or preview email. Note that in Outlook 98 and Outlook Express, when previewing email, active content is executed if the secutity zone allows.
http://www.ntbugtraq.com/default.asp?sid=1&pid=
So Outlook will auto execute scripts iff active scripting is allowed by whatever zone Outlook is using.
Outlook defaults to using the internet zone and I doubt(hope) that active scripting is enabled by default for that zone, but is is likely that many IE users would enable active scripting at some point, since may sites, incluiding MS's IE update, require it.
And I have to say that I think RIAA is definately not amonopoly, especially these days when musicians really do have a viablealternative to using the RIAA member record companies: The Internet, and also a ton of indy labels.
Don't forget about distribution!
There are a handful of major record labels and a handful of distrbutors and they pretty much work in exclusive partnerships. Often the label owns the distributor oughtright. I've never heard of an indie label working with a major distributor. Major retail outlets are rarely willing to deal with anyone but the major distributors (caroline, is the only 'indie' distributor of significant size).
So, you can't access the retailers w/out the distributor and you can't access the distributor without the record company. If it were one record company and one distributor it would clearly be a case of abuse of monopoly power. But because it is a small group of comanies, algededly acting in collusion, it's a bit harder to procecute.
The movies are kinda similar, indie films often collect dust after filming and editing because they can't get a distribution deal.
You have choices, but not if you want to sell a million albums. Granted, you'd make more money selling in the ten's/hundred's of thousands with a small label, but you can't do millions w/o paying the major labels their 95-98%. I hope that as more people work outside of the established system, equitable, open channels will develop. If the indie market gets strong enough it would limit the ablility of the MPAA to play format-switch. I'd hate spending my old age stuck w/ nothing but the britney-bot-5000 because I can't get a player for any of my lp's, cd's or mp3's.
Thanks for the accurate concise information! Most people here appreciate expert analysis (even though *some* posters seem to prefer playing 'bash all lawers').
:(
IIRC, the notice about posters owning their comments came after some news site reproduced slashdot posts in their entirety. The news site did this in a very unflattering way, picking the most violent flames to demonstrate that the geek community is totally irrational. I wish I could remember the news site's name or the aprozimate date
At the time, everyone (including Rob Cmmdr. et. al.) was really pissed off about the unauthorized reproduction, so the current controversy shouldn't come as a shock. It's a bit hypocritical to say that CNN can't reproduce post in their entirety, but Andover can. Since this site depends in part on trust from community, the staff would be wise to ensure that this issue is addressed.
Does anmyone else remember this? Or am I totally confused?
The book isn't out yet.
They didn't contact quoted people.
Therefore, we have no way of knowing if we are quoted in the book.
More importantly, we have no way of knowing if we will be quoted in some future book unless this discussion influences slashdot policy.
Oh, really? I don't see particularly much community-oriented activity taking place at most libraries. I don't see that as the purpose of a library at all. To me, a library is an almost sacred place, a "temple of knowledge" if you will. I've been to many libraries over the course of my life, and I've never felt any less lonely than when reading in front of a computer screen.
While the The Library of Congress and many university libraries aren't cornerstones in their communities, your basic, run-of-the-mill neighborhood library does perform some vital social functions, over and above providing books and research assistance.
Some examples are : free computer and internet access, free meeting rooms for local non-profit groups, literacy programs, childrens programs (like readings in the children's sections), memberships to museums, zoos etc. (check out the pass for free admission), a place for retirees to read the paper and socialize, a clean, quiet place for kids to do thier homework, places for the homeless to get out of the cold, local announcement boards. I imagine that a librarian (or anyone who uses thier local library a lot), could come up with a longer list.
One could argue that these functions are not a library's job, but they do need to be done, and libraries are picking up the slack. Unfortuntely, people who could/would benefit form these well-rounded libraries don't know about the great stuff that's available. And what's even more unfortunate, local libraries do lose funding and end up cutting back on hours and services.
However, for a librarian to avoid giving a wider distibition of information, in a lame attmept to defend library budgets, is pathetic and shameful. Fortunately, most librarians are very enthusiastic about the great possibilities for using computers to distribute information.
the LoC's resources are contrained. if they spend 20% of their money, time, space, on digitizing existing content, they would have 20% fewer resources to apply to the first two priorities..
But his objections weren't resouce or prioritzation issues. His only objections to digitizing books (in the article) centered around his finding books more asthetically pleasing and sacred than electronic media and his reluctance to endager the role of libraries in The Community. The one resource issue he mentioned, digitizing the fragile and less-accessable items first, makes perfect sense and hasn't been flamed in this forum.
The bottom line is that he was hired to accumulate and maintain works and to distibute them, to the best of his ability, to congress, the govenment and the nation. He was not hired to evangelize books as The One True Media or to encourage socially healthy behavior (i.e. discouraging internet research if he feels that going to the library in person is better for us),.
I am very careful about it, only OCing in situations that will give me significantly better performance and price without sacrificing stability. (dual celery 366@550!)
... after doing those things enough, you know about everything but installing the motherboard. And computer work dosn't have the same space and tool requirements of auto mechanics.
If you research your project well, you can build a great machine at a great price. And you can design your system to emphasize your needs.
There probably aren't a lot of female over clockers simply because there aren't a lot of female geeks (or Quake players). I think that there will be more non-geeks doing the over-clocking thing in the future, since more non-geeks have computers and end up doing the maintenance (I even coached my mom, over the phone, while upgrading her modem!)
DYI computer modifications will be much more common than car hot-rodding since building your own pc consists of so many small, common and accessble steps. Most computer owners will at some point be encouraged to install their own memory upgrade or a second disk drive or a new modem etc.
I do wonder about the correlation of gender and hobby choices. I know a lot of guys who tinker with cars or build things out of wood or brew beer and I know a lot of chicks who love to sew or throw pots or do beadwork or make candles. But why does it work out that way? Even with very non-traditional people who don't easily fit into perscribed gener roles?
Probably not, because the guns in gunstores generally aren't illegal. Telling someone where to get an illegal gun, if you know or should have known that your information would lead to an illegal gun sale probably is a criminal offence. In general, the act of aiding criminal activity is criminal.
To use an analogy from another rabid, politcal, over-the-top area of law enforcement, if Alice asks Bob where to buy cocaine and Bob tells her to go to Cathy and Cathy really is a coke dealer, then Alice has committed a crime (unless maybe if Bob was an investigative reporter or a cop and Alice was providing the information under the understanding that Bob wasn't actually looking to buy coke).
One benefit of breaking up M$ into seperate OS, Apps and (maybe?) Compiler companies is that the market (and the SEC?) would provide very strict oversite of buisiness practices. It would be very difficult for one company to take a disadvantagous position in order to further the interests of another company without the financal analysts having fits.
:)
For example, if the application company decided to give a new application away for free as MS did with IE, they'd have to have some really compelling financial reason or else the sockholders would bail.
Also, if there were seperate OS, Compiler/DevTools and Application companies, the application company would actually have to turn a profit.
Personally, I'd like to see at least 2 of the companies be "OS" and "Windowing System"
30 years ago people didn't put most of their retirement money into stocks. Your pension/401K/etc. would have been put in t-bills and bank notes (like HQ CDs) and maybe *some* HQ bonds. After all, mutual funds are a recent invention that didn't get popular till the 80's and retirees old enough to remember the depression aren't too keen on investing what they can't afford to loose in the market.
:)
Well, at least, this is how it was explained to me, having never seen a bear market, I doubt I'm capable of totally beliveing it
Microsoft said for the first time that it would allow computer makers to modify the blueprints to all current and future versions of its Windows software to embed the technology of Microsoft competitors. (ABC)
The Wall Street Journal reported that Microsoft's offer included allowing computer makers to modify the blueprints to all current and future versions of its Windows software to embed competitors' technologies. (CBS)
This is a reallycool idea.
... perhaps in a capitalist robber-barron shot of irony - a privatized state prison?
...
But only if is there any way to make it state or county prison
The other reply to your message reminded me that I know someone who was in federal prison with Michael Milikin. When asked how Mr. Milikin was dealing with jail, he said "Oh, federal prison is pretty mellow, it' state prison that you really want to avoid."
Not like they wouldn't pay off some of their fellow inmates for protection anyway, ala Papillion
I have serious doubts about any company that uses headhunters to find fresh graduates. After all, they can interface directly with the univerity career centers and not have to pay 30-100% of a years salary in commission. Because of the prohibative cost, most places will only use headhunters when they are having trouble finding the right person. When the pool of potentially qualified people is extremly small (CEO, expert in some really specific area, etc.) this is quite understandable. When the pool is really large (anyone with a BS in X) this seems very odd.
IMHO, the best plan is to use any resorces that your school has to offer (a lot of places even do on campus interviews), read _What_Color_Is_Your_Parachute_?_ and research companies and their openings on their homepages.
Ooops, that 4th paragraph should say ...
Of course, if a company has the size and the cluefulness, they try to grow and train the team in such a way as to avoid "suddenly needing an expert" and being over a barrel since this will often cost $100+ per hour.
Form the PHB perspective, sometimes you want to grow your development team for the future and you don't have any immediate need for skills that aren't currently coved by the existing team. So you find someone who is generally good (smart, problem solver, quick learner, hard worker, good communication, plays well w/ others etc.) and the past experience need not be a perfect match to some skill list.
OTOH, sometimes you desperately need someone who is an *expert* in some specifc thing and you don't have time to wait for someone already on your team to gain expertice (i.e. your database guru with an MS and 10 years experince just quit and the jr. database guys are good but they aren't gonna aquire 10 years Oracle kung foo in 6 months).
Most situations probably fall somewhere between these 2 extremes.
Of course, if a company has the size and the cluefulness, they try to
While dealing with clueless HR is annoying ("says here you've used HPUX, Solaris and RedHat, but do you have UNIX experience, I really need someone with UNIX experience" True Story!), in some situations the job description is narrow for a good reason.
Additionally, it's good to bear in mind that job listings are brodcast further and further over time (company corkboard -> newspaper) and the signal to noise ratio increases accordingly so a response to newspaper ad is gonna be screened more anally than a response to a personal recomendation. How would anyone deal with 500+ resumes? _What_Color_Is_Your_Parachute_?_ covers this angle well and is a good resouce for anyone who is job hunting.
Just a warning, Lego Datca used to be for educators only and is still sold primarily through educational resellers (unlike Lego Technics). These resellers vary in their willingness to sell to non-educators. Quite annoying.
actually, i'm suprised that slashdot didn't do this story
No, but it is equivalent to allowing anyone to hire chemical engeineers to figure out the formula. And I believe that this is perfectly legal. In fact, it's the basis for the Designer Imposters perfume line (assuming all liquids are entitled to equal protection under the law).
I believe that they are obligated to disclose the list of companies that recieved your credit report .. if you ask. If you get your credit report, there are usually 2 sections on who has seen your report. The first lists credit inquiries that you initiated - like when you apply for credit or a job. The second lists companies that made inquieries that weren't initiated by you - genreally companies that want to pre-screen you for a credit offer, the source of all those pre-approved credit card mailings.
e lcome/pgConsumerProducts
Note that it is still legal and standard practice by all of the credit reporting agencies, to sell/give your credit report info to companies that are using the info to offer you credit, even if you didn't ask them to. The ruling in this article only applies to companies that aren't trying to offer credit. So citibank can do an unsolicited credit check because they might want to offer you a 'pre-approved' platinum card (they are never really pre-approved, they reserve the right to reject you) but Carnival can't do an unsolicited credit check to check to see if you can afford a cruise before they call you.
Also, you can opt out! You have to write or call each credit agency seperately and request that they not give out unsolicited information. It's kind of a pain because you have to renew your request every 2 years and I believe that they require a seperate form if you want to be removed from all existing lists immediately.
fyi here are the links:
http://www.experian.com/product/consumer/
https://www.econsumer.equifax.com/equifax.app/W
http://www.transunion.com/Consumer/
People who don't make an effort at choosing a college generally go to one they've already heard of, usually a nearby school (of all the graduates from a given HS that attend college, it's not unusual for 90% of those attend the same college (or one of 2-3 colleges)) .
However, if I were shopping for a college, I would give their website a thorough look, since you can see a lot of really great stuff: course materials, office hours, reading lists, etc.
And I would be very leary of a school that appered to have no web page (but for a CS school that would be pretty sad).
But I doubt that there are many good schools that can't find enough qualified students each year. They just like to have lots of applications because:
1) With more apps to choose from, they might get 'better' students.
2) One common measure of a schools worth (I said common, not fair or accurate) is how many applicatins they get per open slot.
3) They get 30-50 bucks per undergad application , 50-100 for grad and up to 200 per app for med school! KA-CHING!
The pipe would have to have at least *some* drug residue to be consiered paraphenelia. An unused pipe, roach clip or bong is perfectly legal if it is unsed, since you can't prove that it was used for or will be used for illegal activity. This is why you can purchase such items, out in the open, at stores, as long as you don't state illegal intent. "You have a lovely selection of tobacco pipes, may I see that 4 foot glass water pipe?" Of course, some of the "plausible" alternate uses for bongs and roach clips are comical at best ...
i actually tried to view the john wayne post, but i couldn't find it very easily.
... one of the benifits of logging on, anonymous coward :)
i had no problem finding your post, because it was a direct reply to one of my own