I don't think that's going to stand up. Undercover cops buy drugs and the state doesn't have to prosecute them for buying them. Why couldn't investigators "illegally" download copyrighted material and still have it considered infringing on the part of the defendant, but not be prosecuted?
Whilst undercover cops may be able to do this random people can't. Also AFAIK this case involves civil rather than criminal law. Which allows for counter suits and the behaviour of the plaintiff to be considered by the court.
It appears that this guy took his employer's 'system', redesigned it and then tried to profit from it by having a vendor sell it back to his employer.
When the software in question never belonged to either the guy or the vendor in the first place.
That stuff would get you fired at my company. I wouldn't expect it to go over well for somebody in the armed forces either.
They might offer him a real "firing" or remind him that bombs have been known to "accidentally" fall off planes.
I'm sorry dude. You did a great job by helping out. But... Your job is to help out. Suing the US Government over something that you produced while working as a government employee isn't going to work.
Can't see this doing much for the guy's future employment prospects either.
These rockets are making it into space, something it took NASA many rockets to do. These just weren't "stage failures" like SpaceX - NASA's failures were CATOs. Rockets just blew up.
Or literally fell off the launch pad due to a serious lack of thrust. Whilst SpaceX appears to have a problem at least this isn't the kind of problem which tends to trash their launch facility.
Warrantless wiretapping, and this ? what's next ? the right for the government to install Video cameras inside of our homes to fight terrorism ?
But not inside the homes of "patricians" probably not even in the homes of quite a few known terrorists either. (The "war on terror" hasn;t stopped the US Government supporting all sorts of terrorist groups.)
It applies to any electronic device able to store data. If you have devised a sneaky way of encrypting information into the phone book of your cell phone then they are allowed to detain it "for a reasonable period of time".
Actually you don't have to devise anything. Just for some conspiracy theorist connected with the DHS/TSA/etc to believe that this is possible.
Wait... So they're preventing AOL'ers and their big ISP ilk from accessing USENET? Is this a return to the golden age? BR>Only if it also means losing the spammers...
If you are using BitLocker then you want your data to be secure. There are probably ways that a compromised boot loader can allow an attacker access to your data.
Which actually means BitLocker is insecure. Since it apparently depends on being started with a machine in a known state.
Vista closes this security hole by requiring the boot loader to be a cryptographically signed binary that it trusts.
Does Vista have the same requirements for the BIOS? Does it have a mechanism to ensure that a trusted BIOS is directly calling the MBR? Since the Windows allows for a "menu" it's fairly trivial to execute any code, then boot Windows. What about a "warm boot"?
If it didn't, this story would instead be "Vista BitLocker encryption not secure on dual boot systems".
If it was designed correctly any software run prior to actual Vista boot would be irrelevent.
What's funny is how you just blurt that out as if it's a reasonable amount. Why is it I'd get significantly less for raping someone?
There are frequently much lighter sentences for killing people, especially of the killer's "weapon of choice" is some kind of vehicle. That's before you even consider that those with the right employer can literally "get away with murder".
Test the bill not the corrupt drunks. Simple software program scans each bill, if it contains one word not in a tenth grade dictionary it is shitcanned!
If it passes this test submit it to a random jury of people aged between 9 and 90. Have them attempt to both understand it and find loopholes.
Senators/Congressmen must pass a comprehension test proving that they actually understand the bill. Have an at-arms-length ombudsman in charge of writing and administering said test. If they fail the test, they don't get to vote.
The problem is voting for bills they don't understand. In some cases havn't even bothered to read. Nothing wrong with someone voting against (or abstaining on) a bill they don't understand, this might be an indication that the bill in question is pure bovine excrement.
If a certain percentage of congresscritters fail the test, the bill is scrapped. If the people voting for it can't understand it, it should not be made into law. Period. Another idea is to fine anyone who votes for a bill that is later found unconstitutional. I want my politicians thinking about law, not politics.
You can't eliminate politics without eliminating people. What is also a good idea with a legislature would be to have a meme of "quality rather than quantity" (either in respect of number of bills or even size of bills) with respect to passing legislation together with one that repealing old laws is at least as important as passing new laws.
When we were upgrading to Visual Studio 2008, we seriously thought about just driving over the border to pick up the copies we needed. Would have saved us a few dollars.
Including the cost of the fuel?
None of the US online stores we tried would ship to Canada either.
Software is cheaper in canada, where it has to support english and french, compared to england where it only needs to support english. American software that only supports english would also sell just fine as-is in england.
It's quite common for unmodified US software to be sold in English speaking countries. Even though US "English" is a minority dialect with some unique spellings, even grammar rules.
I have personally written to Adobe complaining about the massive price differences, and Adobe wrote back claiming it was because of localisation costs (translating software plus documentation into 20 languages can be pricey).
BUT, the bastards are lying. The localisation of any piece of major software is now a matter of course. It's planned in right from the very beginning.
Or it's simply not done at all. e.g. expecting all English speakers to cope with Noah Webster's spellings. It isn't uncommon for OSS to be better here than proprietary software.
It looks like you're trying to make a left turn. *your windshield is covered up by a giant talking animated traffic cone* Would you like to make a three-point turn, a regular left turn, or a U-turn?
Or would you rather hit the object/person which you would be able to see if you just had a regular piece of glass in front of you...
Huh? Which universe are you in? In my universe, Apple requires specific software to be installed on my machine -- software that takes over system functions, and even downloads other software that I don't want, which in turn takes over more of the system. It's the most intrusive DRM system I've ever seen.
It also is quite picky about what OS it will run on. Part of this is likely to be a side effect of the software wanting to subvert parts of the OS...
Well, in my State landlords have the right of "reasonable access". Maybe they can't just snoop as they please, but they do have the right (upon 24 hours notice, I believe) to enter their premises.
The critical difference here is that these terms and conditions are set by the state. A landlord who dosn't comply can find themselves facing both civil and criminal courts. There is no such thing as a "landlord access policy" which can be changed at the landlord's whim.
Agreed, 100%. What I'd recommend is compiling a list of questions to start asking before paying and moving to another provider.
Such an interview can only give you a snapshot of what the situation is now. (Subject to the honesty of the company.) So called "privacy policies" can be changed (and changed back) at the drop of a hat as well as often being written in such a way that they do not for any kind of contractual obligation.
There are some exceptions - like when the government comes and tells you that you can't tell them but, well, look for a company that provides the courtesy of asking first.
Unless it's the "law of the land" (good luck finding a part of the US where that is actually the case) or you have an actual contract stating that then it would only ever be a "courtesy".
A sawed off shotgun under someone's coat while in a bank certainly speaks volumes about probable intent on how it's going to be used.
Having a coat on on a hot day would be a bit of a giveaway.
Should we wait until after that shotgun is fired at a person to detain the shooter? I rather doubt it.
If every bank teller has loaded shotgun underneath the counter then this potential armed robber is in for a bad day, if an unknown number of customers are armed then they are going to be seriously outgunned. It's only when regular people cannot be armed that such criminals become any sort of a problem.
Slashdot Mirror
I saw a job posting requiring 15 years of active directory experience. I sent them a resume' for Sam Beckett.
Presumably the only other takers were "Emmett Brown" and "John Smith".
I don't think that's going to stand up. Undercover cops buy drugs and the state doesn't have to prosecute them for buying them. Why couldn't investigators "illegally" download copyrighted material and still have it considered infringing on the part of the defendant, but not be prosecuted?
Whilst undercover cops may be able to do this random people can't. Also AFAIK this case involves civil rather than criminal law. Which allows for counter suits and the behaviour of the plaintiff to be considered by the court.
It appears that this guy took his employer's 'system', redesigned it and then tried to profit from it by having a vendor sell it back to his employer.
When the software in question never belonged to either the guy or the vendor in the first place.
That stuff would get you fired at my company. I wouldn't expect it to go over well for somebody in the armed forces either.
They might offer him a real "firing" or remind him that bombs have been known to "accidentally" fall off planes.
I'm sorry dude. You did a great job by helping out. But... Your job is to help out. Suing the US Government over something that you produced while working as a government employee isn't going to work.
Can't see this doing much for the guy's future employment prospects either.
Musk's Giant Firework Company seriously believe they can have Falcon 9 up and running in a few months, and have people inside it 'soon' afterwards.
If they can find the problem it may not take that long to fix it.
The people are likely to be in a capsule on top of the rocket, fitted with an LES.
These rockets are making it into space, something it took NASA many rockets to do. These just weren't "stage failures" like SpaceX - NASA's failures were CATOs. Rockets just blew up.
Or literally fell off the launch pad due to a serious lack of thrust.
Whilst SpaceX appears to have a problem at least this isn't the kind of problem which tends to trash their launch facility.
Instead of going after Glider, why not creating a way to detect Glider user, then AUTO-BAN the user?
Or instead of banning them have nasty things happen to them...
Warrantless wiretapping, and this ? what's next ? the right for the government to install Video cameras inside of our homes to fight terrorism ?
But not inside the homes of "patricians" probably not even in the homes of quite a few known terrorists either. (The "war on terror" hasn;t stopped the US Government supporting all sorts of terrorist groups.)
where does this ends ?
"In fire".
It applies to any electronic device able to store data. If you have devised a sneaky way of encrypting information into the phone book of your cell phone then they are allowed to detain it "for a reasonable period of time".
Actually you don't have to devise anything. Just for some conspiracy theorist connected with the DHS/TSA/etc to believe that this is possible.
Wait... So they're preventing AOL'ers and their big ISP ilk from accessing USENET? Is this a return to the golden age?
BR>Only if it also means losing the spammers...
If you are using BitLocker then you want your data to be secure. There are probably ways that a compromised boot loader can allow an attacker access to your data.
Which actually means BitLocker is insecure. Since it apparently depends on being started with a machine in a known state.
Vista closes this security hole by requiring the boot loader to be a cryptographically signed binary that it trusts.
Does Vista have the same requirements for the BIOS? Does it have a mechanism to ensure that a trusted BIOS is directly calling the MBR? Since the Windows allows for a "menu" it's fairly trivial to execute any code, then boot Windows. What about a "warm boot"?
If it didn't, this story would instead be "Vista BitLocker encryption not secure on dual boot systems".
If it was designed correctly any software run prior to actual Vista boot would be irrelevent.
What's funny is how you just blurt that out as if it's a reasonable amount. Why is it I'd get significantly less for raping someone?
There are frequently much lighter sentences for killing people, especially of the killer's "weapon of choice" is some kind of vehicle. That's before you even consider that those with the right employer can literally "get away with murder".
Test the bill not the corrupt drunks. Simple software program scans each bill, if it contains one word not in a tenth grade dictionary it is shitcanned!
If it passes this test submit it to a random jury of people aged between 9 and 90. Have them attempt to both understand it and find loopholes.
we'd be holding elections every three days to replace imprisoned officials
How many years would it take at that rate to get honest officials?
and there'd be three bills passed a year.
So in the worst case you'd get a new stupid law every 4 months...
Senators/Congressmen must pass a comprehension test proving that they actually understand the bill. Have an at-arms-length ombudsman in charge of writing and administering said test. If they fail the test, they don't get to vote.
The problem is voting for bills they don't understand. In some cases havn't even bothered to read. Nothing wrong with someone voting against (or abstaining on) a bill they don't understand, this might be an indication that the bill in question is pure bovine excrement.
If a certain percentage of congresscritters fail the test, the bill is scrapped. If the people voting for it can't understand it, it should not be made into law. Period. Another idea is to fine anyone who votes for a bill that is later found unconstitutional. I want my politicians thinking about law, not politics.
You can't eliminate politics without eliminating people. What is also a good idea with a legislature would be to have a meme of "quality rather than quantity" (either in respect of number of bills or even size of bills) with respect to passing legislation together with one that repealing old laws is at least as important as passing new laws.
Most of Hasbro's board is so old they probably have to have oxygen tents built into the boardroom.
:)
On the other hand they might still be younger than the games they sell
When we were upgrading to Visual Studio 2008, we seriously thought about just driving over the border to pick up the copies we needed. Would have saved us a few dollars.
Including the cost of the fuel?
None of the US online stores we tried would ship to Canada either.
So much for NAFTA...
Software is cheaper in canada, where it has to support english and french, compared to england where it only needs to support english. American software that only supports english would also sell just fine as-is in england.
It's quite common for unmodified US software to be sold in English speaking countries. Even though US "English" is a minority dialect with some unique spellings, even grammar rules.
I have personally written to Adobe complaining about the massive price differences, and Adobe wrote back claiming it was because of localisation costs (translating software plus documentation into 20 languages can be pricey).
BUT, the bastards are lying. The localisation of any piece of major software is now a matter of course. It's planned in right from the very beginning.
Or it's simply not done at all. e.g. expecting all English speakers to cope with Noah Webster's spellings. It isn't uncommon for OSS to be better here than proprietary software.
I have a number of "embedded Windows" devices on my network. Each of them runs for a day or so without reboot.
Given that the major "feature" of Windows is a WIMP GUI the whole concept of "embedded Windows" is something of an oxymoron.
I certainly would not want embedded Windows in my engine control system.
You don't really want a general purpose OS for such a system, quite possibly you don't want anything which would even be generally considered an OS.
It looks like you're trying to make a left turn. *your windshield is covered up by a giant talking animated traffic cone* Would you like to make a three-point turn, a regular left turn, or a U-turn?
Or would you rather hit the object/person which you would be able to see if you just had a regular piece of glass in front of you...
Huh? Which universe are you in? In my universe, Apple requires specific software to be installed on my machine -- software that takes over system functions, and even downloads other software that I don't want, which in turn takes over more of the system. It's the most intrusive DRM system I've ever seen.
It also is quite picky about what OS it will run on. Part of this is likely to be a side effect of the software wanting to subvert parts of the OS...
Well, in my State landlords have the right of "reasonable access". Maybe they can't just snoop as they please, but they do have the right (upon 24 hours notice, I believe) to enter their premises.
The critical difference here is that these terms and conditions are set by the state. A landlord who dosn't comply can find themselves facing both civil and criminal courts. There is no such thing as a "landlord access policy" which can be changed at the landlord's whim.
Agreed, 100%. What I'd recommend is compiling a list of questions to start asking before paying and moving to another provider.
Such an interview can only give you a snapshot of what the situation is now. (Subject to the honesty of the company.) So called "privacy policies" can be changed (and changed back) at the drop of a hat as well as often being written in such a way that they do not for any kind of contractual obligation.
There are some exceptions - like when the government comes and tells you that you can't tell them but, well, look for a company that provides the courtesy of asking first.
Unless it's the "law of the land" (good luck finding a part of the US where that is actually the case) or you have an actual contract stating that then it would only ever be a "courtesy".
If everyone in the bank had a sawed off shotgun under their coat no one would ever be brave enough to pull one to rob the bank.
More likely they'd be carrying pistols, generally more accurate, capable of more shots and don't require wearing a coat.
An armed society is a polite society.
Also one where armed robbers tend not to live very long.
A sawed off shotgun under someone's coat while in a bank certainly speaks volumes about probable intent on how it's going to be used.
Having a coat on on a hot day would be a bit of a giveaway.
Should we wait until after that shotgun is fired at a person to detain the shooter? I rather doubt it.
If every bank teller has loaded shotgun underneath the counter then this potential armed robber is in for a bad day, if an unknown number of customers are armed then they are going to be seriously outgunned.
It's only when regular people cannot be armed that such criminals become any sort of a problem.