The point of pushing that link to 40,000 desktops is not so they can click on it.
It's there because of corprate policy. I do all kinds of things just because of policy. But I do work someplace thats driven by lots of policies.
My solution to the never ending list of link we were pushing out to people was to place them all on a network share and have a window to that folder open up minimized on the desktop when they log in.
The intranet would be an ideal place for those links, but it allows you to give people access to some special programs too that do not need to be installed localy.
Something that I started to do when I see those popups within the page is to imediatly hit F5 to refresh. Most places will only show you that add once so they set a cookie to track if you saw that or not.
So by hitting F5 it you viewing the page again for the 2nd time.
I ment after you quit. Basicly work on it in secret while you wait for the non-compete to expire. I think read it as while you are still employeed, do it behind their back.
You are spot on. If someone is wanting to deal with the "P2P issue" then I would imagin it has no legitimate use in their business.
The cashier, receptionist, file clerk, or general data entry type positions should not need any software that IT does not provide for them. While I would love for that to be the case where I work, it isn't. We end up leaving machines open and try to educate them on the dangers. We have a high rate of spyware related rebuilds because of it.
A non-compete generaly has a limit to it. Check the wording on it closely. I have 2 possible solutions you could ask your layer about.
1) Start working on it as a personal project with friends. Do not form a company at first. You could have someone's sister start the company and register the domain. Once the non-compete expires, every one make it official.
2) Hold off on getting any customers or doing any releases until after the non-compete expires. If challenged in court, present the fact that they can not present any evidence of competition. Not a single clinet of your was a previous client of theirs and none of your current clients could use the other product as an alternitive.
3) Get the ok from your boss before you leave to join a software start up that your friend started. Mention to him that they dont have any product yet but it is a software company. Ask him if that makes it in conflict with the non-compete that you signed when started.
Send out a company wide email with this message and the letter:
Do to legal action imposed on us, we need all users of P2P software to meet with our attorny on Monday. P2P has no valid use for our line of business so our attorny will not represent you in court if you receive one of these letters with your IP address on it. As a reminder the use of P2P software is not allowed on our network.
If its someone important, they will find out your dead from loved ones or other connections. If its some random person you met on the internet, do they realy need to know? While social networking is all the buz, is that the best place to tell someone about a persons death?
We are about to run into this issue head on where I work. Not all computers need to be encrypted. But all mobile devices are required to be encrypted (if they contain EPHI or not). Our research areas tend to use alot of laptops. Alot of them are perrsonal laptops (they also get encrypted).
While most people make rules and talk about patient information, they should include financial and grant in those policies. The requirement to keep them secure and the cost if it gets stolen to the institution is the same. So all private date gets included in the policies and it all gets encrypted.
If you are in this situation, you just need to provide an alternate way to midigate the risk of running unencrypted. The risk they midigate is stolen hardware. You need to get rid of all your laptops. You need to keep the door to your lab locked. You also need to secure the physical machine with a securuty cable and lock. The last one my be a bit much, but if its a tower its not a big deal.
This is an opprotunity for you to ask for a faster computer because they are insisting that its encrypted and its impacting your processing of research data.
The point is not so much that we need or want to tax the rich. Its more that they have received more break and cuts that the rest of us. Obama will raise their taxes hight than its been in 20 years. In fact he is proposing to match the tax rate they had in 1990. It is also a lower tax rate that what Regan had in place.
So on face value it sounds on the edge, its not that bad when you compare it to history.
I think you were spot on with your argument. The hash on its own does nothing. The fact that they used MD5 is just complicating how people are looking at it. It's the algorithm behind the search. What if they created a directory listing of every file name then compared it with one file name at a time from a pre compiled list of child porn image names? What if they use the search feature and typed in each name one at a time? What if it was not names, but full files. Do a bit by bit comparison of every file with a directory of known child porn files? Or what if they just used a MD5 of every file and compared it to the MD5 of known child porn files? Actually, that is what they did. How are any of those any different? In this case, why didn't they have probable cause to search for porn after an eye witness reported the fact that porn was on the computer? Would it have made any difference if he left it on the display or showed it to the cops? They looked at the computer because they knew it had the child porn on it. If I am in a car that gets pulled over and my passenger tell the cop I have drugs under my seat, does he need a warrant to search for it? (Honestly, I don't know. That's why I'm asking.) Isn't it reasonable to conclude that they could still get a warrant based on the eye witness? That would show that they would have eventually found the same files another way to get it back in? It is possible that I watch too much Law & Order.
I see alot of renter/landlord examples here. Thats nice and all, but they have their own special rules.
This reminds me of a slashdot story from sometime in the last 6 monts.
A person took a PC to Best Buy to have them install a DvD-RW drive. While installing it, the employees found child porn and turned him in. In court they argued that the employee had no right to look at the customers personal files. Turns out it was discovered because the employee searched for media on the machine to test the DVD video burning. That was a common practice at the time.
It does not matter if its a hosting provider, your work network, your web based email provider, or your hospital clinic software. They all have full unrestriced access to your files and data. While the policies tell you they will never use that data and its yours. If they think they need to look at it to solve tech issues for you they will. Even if they misunderstood the issue.
Looking at it for tech issues is one thing. If they share that info or do anything with it, thats a problem. I access and look at HIPA information all day from the backend. I constantly see patient schedules, treatment, diseases, finances, and insurance informaiton. But its just data to me and I keep it that way. Its part of my role as the administrator.
Dealerships sell lemons all the time by only showing the customer the paint job. I have one machine that has had no issues after I got Vista setup and the correct drivers. A second one that while it met the recommended specs of Vista, still runs much better and faster now that I have XP back on it.
As a consumer, I still have not seen many features in Vista that make me want it over XP. The only reason I can think of is if you go 64 bit.
I missed this if someone already said it. I'm not one to go around pushing open source, but contributing to more community projects would be the solution to this.
That or some personal projects. They could be looking for the people that live and breathe code. They type of people that would write code at home in their own time.
I woudl say we have about 20 servers and none of our users need the names. We use DFS to consolidate the shared folder locations. We push out a application window with shortcuts to important things and our intranet website. We rename the description of the mapped drives so they don't even see the server name on the drives. (we are in the process to move all shares to a single drive letter mapping with dfs)
Our names start with a 3 letter building code (but currently they all sit in the same building). Then a 2 letter code for function fallowed by a number. In a cluster, the cluster name does not contain the number. If we give the server a different function, we rename it.
Our IT staff is small and only a few of them need to know more than 2-3 server names for what they do.
If they win the political battle to get a mac in (or bring in a personal mac), they still have the standard issue desktop in the office to access everything.
Using both the service tag and the express service code is a little redundant isn't it?
We use the service tag in all of our workstation names with a dash and room number. If they are in a lab, we use a 2 letter short code for the lab and then the computer number. When we set it up in AD, we add the primary user or primary function in the description.
Using the location in the name give the name a lot more value when looking at logs or reports. When we look at the computer name in say AD, we know we have to correct one just by knowing the room number. Its easy for people to communicate changes to use without having to know the entire name.
Honestly, why does it matter if they provide the source as long as they provide drivers that work?
I could see NVidia never giving in. NVidia's drivers are not just hardware drivers. They are a software product all their own. NVidia has invested heavily in them. They have as many people working on the drivers as they do the hardware.
I figured you could seperate your code like this. But I didn't think you could distribute them together?
I guess they are not distributing it to anyone else, just useing it on their own devices.
So if I want to include some GPL2 code in my project, I have to seperate it into its own library or plug-in module. Then I don't have to release the rest of my code under the GPL2, just the other module? That does not sound right to me.
Slashdot Mirror
The point of pushing that link to 40,000 desktops is not so they can click on it.
It's there because of corprate policy. I do all kinds of things just because of policy. But I do work someplace thats driven by lots of policies.
My solution to the never ending list of link we were pushing out to people was to place them all on a network share and have a window to that folder open up minimized on the desktop when they log in.
The intranet would be an ideal place for those links, but it allows you to give people access to some special programs too that do not need to be installed localy.
Something that I started to do when I see those popups within the page is to imediatly hit F5 to refresh. Most places will only show you that add once so they set a cookie to track if you saw that or not.
So by hitting F5 it you viewing the page again for the 2nd time.
try {
}
catch (exception ex){
}
I ment after you quit. Basicly work on it in secret while you wait for the non-compete to expire. I think read it as while you are still employeed, do it behind their back.
You are spot on. If someone is wanting to deal with the "P2P issue" then I would imagin it has no legitimate use in their business.
The cashier, receptionist, file clerk, or general data entry type positions should not need any software that IT does not provide for them. While I would love for that to be the case where I work, it isn't. We end up leaving machines open and try to educate them on the dangers. We have a high rate of spyware related rebuilds because of it.
A non-compete generaly has a limit to it. Check the wording on it closely. I have 2 possible solutions you could ask your layer about.
1) Start working on it as a personal project with friends. Do not form a company at first. You could have someone's sister start the company and register the domain. Once the non-compete expires, every one make it official.
2) Hold off on getting any customers or doing any releases until after the non-compete expires. If challenged in court, present the fact that they can not present any evidence of competition. Not a single clinet of your was a previous client of theirs and none of your current clients could use the other product as an alternitive.
3) Get the ok from your boss before you leave to join a software start up that your friend started. Mention to him that they dont have any product yet but it is a software company. Ask him if that makes it in conflict with the non-compete that you signed when started.
No, but this letter can.
Send out a company wide email with this message and the letter:
Do to legal action imposed on us, we need all users of P2P software to meet with our attorny on Monday. P2P has no valid use for our line of business so our attorny will not represent you in court if you receive one of these letters with your IP address on it. As a reminder the use of P2P software is not allowed on our network.
Sometimes is ok to just let the account expire.
If its someone important, they will find out your dead from loved ones or other connections. If its some random person you met on the internet, do they realy need to know? While social networking is all the buz, is that the best place to tell someone about a persons death?
At the same time, people can be over confident and what they know can deceive them. I would bet there is a set of cons that hit smart people harder.
On that note, I have meet some very smart but very stupid people.
We are about to run into this issue head on where I work. Not all computers need to be encrypted. But all mobile devices are required to be encrypted (if they contain EPHI or not). Our research areas tend to use alot of laptops. Alot of them are perrsonal laptops (they also get encrypted).
While most people make rules and talk about patient information, they should include financial and grant in those policies. The requirement to keep them secure and the cost if it gets stolen to the institution is the same. So all private date gets included in the policies and it all gets encrypted.
If you are in this situation, you just need to provide an alternate way to midigate the risk of running unencrypted. The risk they midigate is stolen hardware. You need to get rid of all your laptops. You need to keep the door to your lab locked. You also need to secure the physical machine with a securuty cable and lock. The last one my be a bit much, but if its a tower its not a big deal.
This is an opprotunity for you to ask for a faster computer because they are insisting that its encrypted and its impacting your processing of research data.
The point is not so much that we need or want to tax the rich. Its more that they have received more break and cuts that the rest of us. Obama will raise their taxes hight than its been in 20 years. In fact he is proposing to match the tax rate they had in 1990. It is also a lower tax rate that what Regan had in place.
So on face value it sounds on the edge, its not that bad when you compare it to history.
I think you were spot on with your argument.
The hash on its own does nothing. The fact that they used MD5 is just complicating how people are looking at it. It's the algorithm behind the search.
What if they created a directory listing of every file name then compared it with one file name at a time from a pre compiled list of child porn image names? What if they use the search feature and typed in each name one at a time? What if it was not names, but full files. Do a bit by bit comparison of every file with a directory of known child porn files? Or what if they just used a MD5 of every file and compared it to the MD5 of known child porn files? Actually, that is what they did. How are any of those any different?
In this case, why didn't they have probable cause to search for porn after an eye witness reported the fact that porn was on the computer? Would it have made any difference if he left it on the display or showed it to the cops? They looked at the computer because they knew it had the child porn on it.
If I am in a car that gets pulled over and my passenger tell the cop I have drugs under my seat, does he need a warrant to search for it? (Honestly, I don't know. That's why I'm asking.)
Isn't it reasonable to conclude that they could still get a warrant based on the eye witness? That would show that they would have eventually found the same files another way to get it back in?
It is possible that I watch too much Law & Order.
I see alot of renter/landlord examples here. Thats nice and all, but they have their own special rules.
This reminds me of a slashdot story from sometime in the last 6 monts.
A person took a PC to Best Buy to have them install a DvD-RW drive. While installing it, the employees found child porn and turned him in. In court they argued that the employee had no right to look at the customers personal files. Turns out it was discovered because the employee searched for media on the machine to test the DVD video burning. That was a common practice at the time.
It does not matter if its a hosting provider, your work network, your web based email provider, or your hospital clinic software. They all have full unrestriced access to your files and data. While the policies tell you they will never use that data and its yours. If they think they need to look at it to solve tech issues for you they will. Even if they misunderstood the issue.
Looking at it for tech issues is one thing. If they share that info or do anything with it, thats a problem. I access and look at HIPA information all day from the backend. I constantly see patient schedules, treatment, diseases, finances, and insurance informaiton. But its just data to me and I keep it that way. Its part of my role as the administrator.
Those are not the problem.
Dealerships sell lemons all the time by only showing the customer the paint job. I have one machine that has had no issues after I got Vista setup and the correct drivers. A second one that while it met the recommended specs of Vista, still runs much better and faster now that I have XP back on it.
As a consumer, I still have not seen many features in Vista that make me want it over XP. The only reason I can think of is if you go 64 bit.
Opps, my bad
I thought I had it on stun...
what does awsd do?
I missed this if someone already said it. I'm not one to go around pushing open source, but contributing to more community projects would be the solution to this.
That or some personal projects. They could be looking for the people that live and breathe code. They type of people that would write code at home in their own time.
Just a thought.
I wish.
If they can support it without us, all the better.
We tell them it's not supported so we don't have to support them.
I woudl say we have about 20 servers and none of our users need the names. We use DFS to consolidate the shared folder locations. We push out a application window with shortcuts to important things and our intranet website. We rename the description of the mapped drives so they don't even see the server name on the drives. (we are in the process to move all shares to a single drive letter mapping with dfs)
Our names start with a 3 letter building code (but currently they all sit in the same building). Then a 2 letter code for function fallowed by a number. In a cluster, the cluster name does not contain the number. If we give the server a different function, we rename it.
Our IT staff is small and only a few of them need to know more than 2-3 server names for what they do.
Our mac solution was simple.
We say sorry, we don't support macs.
If they win the political battle to get a mac in (or bring in a personal mac), they still have the standard issue desktop in the office to access everything.
Using both the service tag and the express service code is a little redundant isn't it?
We use the service tag in all of our workstation names with a dash and room number. If they are in a lab, we use a 2 letter short code for the lab and then the computer number. When we set it up in AD, we add the primary user or primary function in the description.
Using the location in the name give the name a lot more value when looking at logs or reports. When we look at the computer name in say AD, we know we have to correct one just by knowing the room number. Its easy for people to communicate changes to use without having to know the entire name.
Go hit up your state surplus auctions. Sometimes you can find a very old laptop that it too outdated for anything but its tiny display.
Honestly, why does it matter if they provide the source as long as they provide drivers that work?
I could see NVidia never giving in. NVidia's drivers are not just hardware drivers. They are a software product all their own. NVidia has invested heavily in them. They have as many people working on the drivers as they do the hardware.
They gain no benifit from releasing the code.
You might have to track down a proxy to surf from.
I figured you could seperate your code like this. But I didn't think you could distribute them together?
I guess they are not distributing it to anyone else, just useing it on their own devices.
So if I want to include some GPL2 code in my project, I have to seperate it into its own library or plug-in module. Then I don't have to release the rest of my code under the GPL2, just the other module? That does not sound right to me.