All they need is to form a national filter list committee, and use Junkbuster, with some option for easily switching between filter lists. JB on Windows automatically detects the filter list file being written to, and reloads it. They could have a simple app that has lists for porn, hate speech, adverts, etc., that can combine the selected lists and write it to the block file. If it kicked in at logon and after X minutes of inactivity, it would reset back to the defaults and pop up a window informing the user, who can then turn it all off again. I haven't read the bill recently, and can't find it right away, but would this pass the requirements, or is an off switch not allowed? Could it be passworded, with codes issued to adults by staff?
The purpose shouldn't matter; this issue is that of doing the security-checking of another company.
The purpose may not matter to you, but it sure matters to me. The purpose is everything in this distinction. eWeek are saying "Hey, come help us test the security on these servers". Honeynet are saying "Hey, come learn about tracking down crackers". SDMI were saying "Hey, come help us fuck you over in the future".
that's such a brittle mechanism for determining a vulnerable machine that it could EASILY be defeated by simply changing the banner.
And it could easily be defeated by patching wu-ftpd. I suppose the general trend of broadcasting your module name and version could be criticised for inviting this kind of attack. It may be worthwhile compiling all of the various ftpd signature strings into your ftpd, and modding it to send a random one each time.
"The video technology space is thoroughly covered by patents, many of which overlap or conflict," the Project Mayo site says. "As a consequence, it is unlikely that any video technology will be created any time soon that is wholly 'free'...Use of the core code in hardware or software products might infringe on existing patents and is done at your own risk."
If this is the case, then even clean-room developing a new video compression format would breach one or more patents. In this situation the patents become morally unsustainable. They may be legally sustainable, because "they" can afford patent lawyers. Your point stands, though, I doubt that folks like Red Hat could ship DivX without running foul of IP lawyers. I wonder what jurisdictions they have these patents in.
If we wanted to tie it to one OS, Microsoft could've designed some proprietary application that browses over Netbios or some such ungodly protocol and uses whatever-their-buzzword-of-the-day technology is.
Three words: Embrace and extend.
My School Infiltration Experience
on
Infiltration
·
· Score: 1
I went to a private school (Bedstone) in Shropshire, England, which is an old country estate. The cellars were used as boys' changing rooms, and we found a small tunnel leading from the cellars to a hall, and we could see out of grates that were underneath a couple of benches. It was fantastic just lying there watching teachers and pupils go by, oblivious to the pairs of eyes peering out of the darkness. The rats were a bit of a nuisance, though.
Does that mean that since I am the one running Napster, and thus I am the one making the copy from someone else's hard drive, that downloading copyrighted music from Napster is legal?
:-) Possibly not, because it's the other computer that's doing half of the work of copying - it's transmitting the bytes, and you are receiving them. It's a very grey area.
DMCA applies to copyright. To apply it to this case, wouldn't the pilot (and anyone else) have to have an explicit copyright notice at the bottom of each page?
If you start overgeneralizing by saying "Open Source is secure, Closed Source is not" then you're making a fundamental mistake. Rhetoric and dogma are not conducive to practical security.
You're right, but there are advantages, as long as the user keeps up to date with security alerts, and is ready to apply security patches as they come out. I think open source improves the likelihood that the person that discovers the security flaw is a white hat rather than a black hat.
Absolutely, I was just thinking along the same lines. This is a perfect example of what the DMCA does cover - they really are accessing technologically-protected copyrighted material, as against DeCSS, which merely allows use of material that has already been accessed (i.e. bought).
Look, the guy admits that it's poor - would you criticise the quthor of a ROT13 program for hawking dodgy encryption? The damn thing's called EnigmaMail, so it should be obvious that it's based on cracked WWII technology!
I think we have to insist that any voting system implemented be Open Source, and specifically GPL, so no one can go and put backdoors in it without someone being able to find them.
I don't see how the GPL provides better protection than any other licence. If it used, say, the Artistic Licence, then sure, someone could take the source and build their own closed-source voting system from it, but why the fsck should I care? So long as the voting booths use the fully-disclosed source, that's fine by me. They could build and install a custom version of it regardless of the licence, because you don't have to disclose the source to custom versions of GPL software that you aren't distributing.
It's certainly a good arguement against using anything that comes as binary on a machine that needs to be secure. My machine doesn't need to be secure, though.
Sure there are accidental backdoors in OS products, but they are usually hard to use, because they rely on something like a buffer overrun, and you have to write some machine code to stick on the end of a long input, or something like that. Logging on with user:backdoor password:borland is a different matter entirely, as it works out of the box.
The sensible thing for Borland to do would have been to remove the back door beofre releasing the source, so at least their existing users wouldn't get shafted so badly.
While I don't agree that your solution absolves you of any moral consequences, any more than setting up a sentry gun would absolve you of responsibility for the deaths that it caused, I agree with your basic point. Copyright makes certain guarantees to both parties, and both Microsoft and the MPAA/DVDCCA are welching on their side of the deal. Copyright law was set up to prevent this kind of thing, and makes it illegal. They are getting away with it, because they are richer than us and can afford better lawyers and politicians than we can. That is what absolves me of moral responsibility for ignoring the licence agreement.
p.s. I do pay for most of the software I use, such as Win95, Paint Shop Pro, 4Dos, Quick View Plus, etc.
Make it clear to the consumer that you don't trust them, that you consider them lying theiving scum whoever they are. People will to some extent behave how you expect them --
Copyright is a bargain between society and the producer. It draws the line between what the public can do, and what they can't, and also imposes some restritcions on the producer. If the producer takes steps to deny me the rights that copyright law guarantees me, then I feel justified in interpreting that as the producer saying that copyright law does not apply to their product.
Btw, many NICs allow the MAC-address to be changed:-)
It still presents a significant barrier to companies multiple-installing, as each machine needs to have it's MAC address changed before the install, and changed back afterwards (I presume that multiple machines with the same MAC address would cause a problem on a LAN).
Private companies with a proprietary $$$ product to promote can do their own publicity and partnerships. Sure, Red Hat, VA, etc. are all private companies with $$$ products, but the free software community shouldn't rely on them for the promotion of free software products. If they will, though, what's wrong with helping them meet potential customers? I don't think it's wrong to be an open source advocate.
Slashdot Mirror
All they need is to form a national filter list committee, and use Junkbuster, with some option for easily switching between filter lists. JB on Windows automatically detects the filter list file being written to, and reloads it. They could have a simple app that has lists for porn, hate speech, adverts, etc., that can combine the selected lists and write it to the block file. If it kicked in at logon and after X minutes of inactivity, it would reset back to the defaults and pop up a window informing the user, who can then turn it all off again. I haven't read the bill recently, and can't find it right away, but would this pass the requirements, or is an off switch not allowed? Could it be passworded, with codes issued to adults by staff?
[Insert favourite Florida / Supreme Court joke here]
If you mod this down, be a darling and mod the parent up. And vice versa.
I went to a private school (Bedstone) in Shropshire, England, which is an old country estate. The cellars were used as boys' changing rooms, and we found a small tunnel leading from the cellars to a hall, and we could see out of grates that were underneath a couple of benches. It was fantastic just lying there watching teachers and pupils go by, oblivious to the pairs of eyes peering out of the darkness. The rats were a bit of a nuisance, though.
You missed out brains. I've got loads of tunes and pictures in my head, which is clearly theft. $1,000 per cubic inch sounds about fair to me.
Would you want to live in a "true" democracy? Would you let two wolves and a sheep vote on what to have for lunch?
Absolutely, I was just thinking along the same lines. This is a perfect example of what the DMCA does cover - they really are accessing technologically-protected copyrighted material, as against DeCSS, which merely allows use of material that has already been accessed (i.e. bought).
Look, the guy admits that it's poor - would you criticise the quthor of a ROT13 program for hawking dodgy encryption? The damn thing's called EnigmaMail, so it should be obvious that it's based on cracked WWII technology!
It's certainly a good arguement against using anything that comes as binary on a machine that needs to be secure. My machine doesn't need to be secure, though.
Sure there are accidental backdoors in OS products, but they are usually hard to use, because they rely on something like a buffer overrun, and you have to write some machine code to stick on the end of a long input, or something like that. Logging on with user:backdoor password:borland is a different matter entirely, as it works out of the box.
The sensible thing for Borland to do would have been to remove the back door beofre releasing the source, so at least their existing users wouldn't get shafted so badly.
On a related note, does anyone know how the Motorola thing turned out?
Go to alt.fan.elite and search for jjffe - it rocks!
p.s. I do pay for most of the software I use, such as Win95, Paint Shop Pro, 4Dos, Quick View Plus, etc.
Now that was funny.
Private companies with a proprietary $$$ product to promote can do their own publicity and partnerships. Sure, Red Hat, VA, etc. are all private companies with $$$ products, but the free software community shouldn't rely on them for the promotion of free software products. If they will, though, what's wrong with helping them meet potential customers? I don't think it's wrong to be an open source advocate.