Dude, they're a company. They have a responsibility to make a product that is as free of defects as possible. He has no responsibility to them. If you were making this argument for, say, the Linux project, I can see where you're coming from. The Linux developers make something great and they give it away. But Apple ain't no charity.
As great as arguing from analogy can be, it's really a weak form of emotional badgering. Make a real argument.
Can you state why you think it is the ethical thing to do? I mean, it doesn't take a genius to find a security vulnerability. Apple are quite capable of discovering it themselves. Why should he be ethically required to do Apple's job for them?
1. Not sure who would buy it. 2. Why is that bad? Who should get it, the lowest bidder? 3. As one of the few people even bothering to look for security issues on Macs, I guess he has the market cornered.
Sounds like a great plan. Make it compulsory to report vulnerabilities eh? Maybe even ban the selling of vulnerabilities. Kinda makes you wonder why any third party would bother looking for them.
Yeah, spinning a habitat is pretty cheap. Especially when you habitat is not in interstellar space.. the Sun provides more energy than you can use. It's so damn easy and so much better to live in space that it is a travesty that it has been over 30 years since O'Neil worked it all out for us and we're still sitting here on this rock. We're still suffering poor crops and unpredictable weather. We're still burning fossil fuels and making radioactive wastes. We're still struggling with flus and parasites and living under the threat of imminent death of the species by planet killing meteors.
I think I'd rather build a good sized O'Neil Colony, put 10,000 people in it and take a few years to reach Mars. At least then you'd have something to do when you get there (colonize). Although, I don't know if there'd be much point.. Space colonies are a much nicer place to live than a dusty dead gravity hole.
I think this is another example of why Star Trek earth wasn't the utopia that it was made out to be. I mean a people obsessed with purity of genetics is not exactly admirable.
One also has to ask, why remain so vulnerable? Why not alter yourself to be better adapted to space? Clinging to "pure" humanity when it isn't in your interest is kinda primitive. People with skin twice as think and pores that close when exposed to vacuum, seems like something a people who went through a eugenics wars could manage.
Which is the ultimate in Star Trek stupidity of course. We've got force fields and warp drives and transporters but you need to go outside? Oh, put on this suit which hasn't changed much from the Apollo days.
One of the interesting space startups at the moment is Orbital Outfitters, a company supplying space suits for the NewSpace community. Go sell them this technology so they can actually test it.
I don't doubt that was her thought process... specially, she was probably thinking about it as a matter of guilt, because that's the RIAA wants her to think about it. "I did something wrong" not "I caused significant damages to a music company". The first is easy to plant in people's minds, the second isn't.
Which is why I was saying that you shouldn't help them do that.
I love the way people keep throwing around this word "guilty". Like this is a criminal case. The longer people apply criminal law terminology like "guilty" and "innocent" and "theft" the easier it will be for the copyright owners to get new criminal laws passed.
Slashdot Mirror
Dude, they're a company. They have a responsibility to make a product that is as free of defects as possible. He has no responsibility to them. If you were making this argument for, say, the Linux project, I can see where you're coming from. The Linux developers make something great and they give it away. But Apple ain't no charity.
As great as arguing from analogy can be, it's really a weak form of emotional badgering. Make a real argument.
Maybe because there was only 3 people looking for Mac vulnerabilities?
And each of them found one.
Can you state why you think it is the ethical thing to do? I mean, it doesn't take a genius to find a security vulnerability. Apple are quite capable of discovering it themselves. Why should he be ethically required to do Apple's job for them?
Why do you think concealing a vulnerability is morally reprehensible?
Some people think revealing a vulnerability is morally reprehensible.
Some people think not revealing a vulnerability to anyone but the person who made the damn thing in the first place is morally reprehensible.
You can't just make a blanket statement about a complex issue like this and assume we all know what your position is.
1. Not sure who would buy it.
2. Why is that bad? Who should get it, the lowest bidder?
3. As one of the few people even bothering to look for security issues on Macs, I guess he has the market cornered.
Sounds like a great plan. Make it compulsory to report vulnerabilities eh? Maybe even ban the selling of vulnerabilities. Kinda makes you wonder why any third party would bother looking for them.
Look at Slashdot, they don't need no stinkin' editors.
Yeah, spinning a habitat is pretty cheap. Especially when you habitat is not in interstellar space.. the Sun provides more energy than you can use. It's so damn easy and so much better to live in space that it is a travesty that it has been over 30 years since O'Neil worked it all out for us and we're still sitting here on this rock. We're still suffering poor crops and unpredictable weather. We're still burning fossil fuels and making radioactive wastes. We're still struggling with flus and parasites and living under the threat of imminent death of the species by planet killing meteors.
I think I'd rather build a good sized O'Neil Colony, put 10,000 people in it and take a few years to reach Mars. At least then you'd have something to do when you get there (colonize). Although, I don't know if there'd be much point.. Space colonies are a much nicer place to live than a dusty dead gravity hole.
Male astronauts don't get a boners.
They ARE boners.
I think this is another example of why Star Trek earth wasn't the utopia that it was made out to be. I mean a people obsessed with purity of genetics is not exactly admirable.
One also has to ask, why remain so vulnerable? Why not alter yourself to be better adapted to space? Clinging to "pure" humanity when it isn't in your interest is kinda primitive. People with skin twice as think and pores that close when exposed to vacuum, seems like something a people who went through a eugenics wars could manage.
Heard of an existence proof? There's a model in the picture wearing the damn suit.
won't people see the diaper?
Which is the ultimate in Star Trek stupidity of course. We've got force fields and warp drives and transporters but you need to go outside? Oh, put on this suit which hasn't changed much from the Apollo days.
It's also known as the "me too" space colonization book. It pales in comparison to the O'Neil original.
One of the interesting space startups at the moment is Orbital Outfitters, a company supplying space suits for the NewSpace community. Go sell them this technology so they can actually test it.
Then they will fail and I will go work for the competitor who replaces them in the marketplace.
Actually, some of us get paid the big bucks because we're one of ten people in the world who can actually do the job.
So, uhhh, speak for yourself.
I don't doubt that was her thought process... specially, she was probably thinking about it as a matter of guilt, because that's the RIAA wants her to think about it. "I did something wrong" not "I caused significant damages to a music company". The first is easy to plant in people's minds, the second isn't.
Which is why I was saying that you shouldn't help them do that.
I love the way people keep throwing around this word "guilty". Like this is a criminal case. The longer people apply criminal law terminology like "guilty" and "innocent" and "theft" the easier it will be for the copyright owners to get new criminal laws passed.
Stop playing their game.
Hey, they was detective work!
Sure, it wasn't do by registered detectives and is therefore illegal, but we tried!!
That's only the case for blind TCP hijacking.