but even if it is a hole there should be a specific day that that testing is run so that an additional backup can be made. Just because you are testing the security of your system doesn't mean you shouldn't be able to recover if you find a fatal problem.
Even still, if you're in the local bank's computer system, you've now gotten a level of trust that you didn't have before. With time and work, you can run your way into the core, it's just a bit more roundabout.
Well that's not nessesarily what's meant by ROE, they may mean things like between hours X and Y no tests can be made because critical backups are being done. While no attacker will wait for backups to finish, this is a reasonable request unless the security people feel the need to test the backup software.
There are a few legitimate rules that you need to set in place before you can do something like this, like a set of IP ranges to be used or something. They can find their way in, but there's no point in giving some poor sys admin a heart attack when a bunch of odd IPs start showing up.
So because no one is willing to overcome the difficult (but still obtainable) barrier to entry, the government has the right to force the manufacturer to lower his barriers?
You forgot #4, big words should require an explination.
I actualy convinced my college public speaking class to sign a petition and join a campaign to band Dihydrogen Monoxide from all facilities on campus, and I used plenty of authorative citations including the World Health Org, Public Health Center, Maryland Medical (IIRC) and a few others. It was all 100% truthful, the only thing I didn't do was give the common name for DHMO, and no one bothered to ask. In all, you need to make sure you have big words clarified if you don't understand them.
I am indeed old enough to drive, and I bought a car without a proprietary POS computer. Sure, it's a bit older than a brand spanking new car, but it doesn't cost me $2,000 to fix a problem with it. Why is it that we go on and on about how you don't have to buy microsoft, you can just use linux and how you have a choice but when it comes to something like this, we say the more difficult choice is not acceptable. You do have a choice, find a manufacturer that doesn't do this. Start a public boycott and campaign, or buy older cars. Get off your ass and do something abou tit instead of hoping for the governemnt to fix it for you.
Hmm, I didn't know that older cars were all proprietary computer based. And I'm sure you can find some manufacturers out there with open cars. And of course there's always the option to build your own or buy one from someone that builds cars.
I'm not making shit up. How do you think a lot of competeing products to things have been made? They bought the competetors product and broke it open to see what was inside.
But always in abuse of power or people or the evironment. And it's been stretched, the wordign clearly states that it's for intersate and inter continental commerce. Doea repair of a localy bought vehicle by a local dealer qualify? I don't really think so.
Beyond that, they still have to show abuse of position.
Because the competators can still go buy a car, break it and see what signals come back to the computer. IOW, they can compete, but they have to spend some money to do it. Now, if they were being sued for doing something like that, then I would have a problem. The fact that the manufacturer wont just hand over the keys to the vault though doesn't make it illegal.
Look, the regulatory part is there. We have laws in place to ensure that businesses do not abuse monopoly positions or their workers or the environment. Copyright et al are constitutionaly granted aspects. What I don't want is the government going into PRIVATE businesses and telling them what information (short of the nessesary regulatory information) they need to release. These safety codes do not have anythign to do with regulateing the business or monitoring it, therefore the government has no vested interest in control over it.
And what prevents an indie repair shop from buying a car (or getting one donated) and breaking it to see what error codes are produced when something goes wrong and then matching them up?
If it's cost, you better come up with something else because there is no law saying you have to be allowed to compete on the cheap.
Now, if they were being sued for doing that, then we would have a different story.
They aren't using their huge market share to lock out competitors. They are designing a product that functions in such a way that competitors can not service them. If you don't like it don't buy it. You have a choice.
That doesn't change the fact that this law is unreasonable. In the first case, it's understandable. You are waranteed against damage, but then you come to find out that the repair can only be done at the dealership (though to tell the truth, this doesn't seem any different from computer warantees. I'll have to look into it more). The fact is though, that the governemtn shouldn't be forcing businesses to do this. Just because you want to get your repair done somewhere doesn't give you the right. I would guess the case you are refering to had to do with the fact that having to have the repairs done at the dealership was not part of the original warantee contract.
If it was, all I can really say is read the waranty. A business has every right to make restrictions like that. And if you don't like it, then you don't buy it.
Why is this good? Why is the government stepping into private business matters and FORCING them to make things easier for their competition a good thing? A monopoly is not an inherrently bad thing, which is why the laws cover the ABUSE of a monopoly position. Until these manufacturers start abusing their positions, the government should keep itself out of this.
Actualy, you CAN discriminate based ont he market size or how the market works. A monopoly is not inherrently bad. THe laws cover the ABUSE of a monopoly.
A lot of it depends on the place, for example, my uncle owns a nightclub/bar which hosts live music almost every night, he has a couple regular bands that play and they perform and retain the full profits of their ticket sales because they almost always sell the place out and the money my uncle makes off selling food and drinks at those shows more than outwieghs the productions costs.
But yeah, in a lot of places, the band usualy pays some facility charge whether it's for crew or just the venue. The size of the location changes the cost too, a place that can only hold 50 people is going to be much less expensive to play at than a place that seats 300
There ARE people who run because they want to make things better. They do not get the monetary support that they need in order to compete with greedy, bribe-able politicians in the media, because they have scruples.
Where? Where are they? I haven't seen one. You see a couple of them at the local level, but I haven't seen a single one beyond that.
I'm not excusing anyone, I'm saying the problem we have is that the public sucks. These are the people we're electing to office because they are the best we have. And that's sad. We need to demand that our politicians hold our interests at heart, and when they don't get rid of them. Maybe then we can gain some ground. But the problem is, public interests are varried. There's no way to win because everyone is self serving. In otherwords, it's a vicious cycle.
Yes you have a right to use your computer without being spied on, but once you open a public port on a public network accessable to anyone for any reason, any information you display on that port is public information for anyone who cares to read it.
Well for us, to cost of recording a CD (Studio time, mixing, pressing etc) for our last CD came out to a bout $800 - $1,000. A lot of it depends on where you go and what equipment you use. We're currently talking with a local guy who has his own studio in his house (and we've listened to some stuff he's recorded already from it, so we've verified the quality) and we're looking at negotiating out a cheaper run, hopefuly about $600 total.
At $10 a CD, it would cost us between 80 and 100 CDs to recoup our last recording costs.
After any given concert, we sell maybe 5 or 10 CDs, and our sales outside of concerts are little or none.
The costs to perform can vary depending on where we go. Some places let us use the facility for free and we get back the full ticket price (usualy $5 a head, sometimes $8). Other places we perform at (like the local college) charge about $300 for 2 hours, but this includes a full sound crew as well. Usualy the concerts held there are a combination of ourselves and other groups, and we as the hosts pay the full facility charges, and get full profits, while the other groups get free advertising.
I should mention that we are a small a capella group, so we don't have much in the way of equipment costs. Our incomes don't rely on our sales (we all have jobs outside of this), but it's always nice to have extra income.
In all, we do this for fun, but obviously we have cost incurred and an interest in selling CDs and music (recording costs come out of our pockets untill we recoup the costs). It's obvious to us though that the CDs are not where the money is. People come to see and hear us perform. They like the concerts and the live sound. The recordings are mostly an extra feature.
Slashdot Mirror
but even if it is a hole there should be a specific day that that testing is run so that an additional backup can be made. Just because you are testing the security of your system doesn't mean you shouldn't be able to recover if you find a fatal problem.
Even still, if you're in the local bank's computer system, you've now gotten a level of trust that you didn't have before. With time and work, you can run your way into the core, it's just a bit more roundabout.
Well that's not nessesarily what's meant by ROE, they may mean things like between hours X and Y no tests can be made because critical backups are being done. While no attacker will wait for backups to finish, this is a reasonable request unless the security people feel the need to test the backup software.
There are a few legitimate rules that you need to set in place before you can do something like this, like a set of IP ranges to be used or something. They can find their way in, but there's no point in giving some poor sys admin a heart attack when a bunch of odd IPs start showing up.
So because no one is willing to overcome the difficult (but still obtainable) barrier to entry, the government has the right to force the manufacturer to lower his barriers?
You forgot #4, big words should require an explination.
I actualy convinced my college public speaking class to sign a petition and join a campaign to band Dihydrogen Monoxide from all facilities on campus, and I used plenty of authorative citations including the World Health Org, Public Health Center, Maryland Medical (IIRC) and a few others. It was all 100% truthful, the only thing I didn't do was give the common name for DHMO, and no one bothered to ask. In all, you need to make sure you have big words clarified if you don't understand them.
Try clicking the little white button in the top right corner of your window. Instant oldschool finder window.
I know it's not quite what you intended, but doesn't spring loaded folders and copy and paste take care of your issues in the 4th paragraph?
And when you read books or magazines or newpapers you read ALL the ads that are included right? All of them? You never skip even one.
I am indeed old enough to drive, and I bought a car without a proprietary POS computer. Sure, it's a bit older than a brand spanking new car, but it doesn't cost me $2,000 to fix a problem with it. Why is it that we go on and on about how you don't have to buy microsoft, you can just use linux and how you have a choice but when it comes to something like this, we say the more difficult choice is not acceptable. You do have a choice, find a manufacturer that doesn't do this. Start a public boycott and campaign, or buy older cars. Get off your ass and do something abou tit instead of hoping for the governemnt to fix it for you.
Hmm, I didn't know that older cars were all proprietary computer based. And I'm sure you can find some manufacturers out there with open cars. And of course there's always the option to build your own or buy one from someone that builds cars.
I'm not making shit up. How do you think a lot of competeing products to things have been made? They bought the competetors product and broke it open to see what was inside.
But always in abuse of power or people or the evironment. And it's been stretched, the wordign clearly states that it's for intersate and inter continental commerce. Doea repair of a localy bought vehicle by a local dealer qualify? I don't really think so.
Beyond that, they still have to show abuse of position.
Because the competators can still go buy a car, break it and see what signals come back to the computer. IOW, they can compete, but they have to spend some money to do it. Now, if they were being sued for doing something like that, then I would have a problem. The fact that the manufacturer wont just hand over the keys to the vault though doesn't make it illegal.
Hello strawman how are you today.
Look, the regulatory part is there. We have laws in place to ensure that businesses do not abuse monopoly positions or their workers or the environment. Copyright et al are constitutionaly granted aspects. What I don't want is the government going into PRIVATE businesses and telling them what information (short of the nessesary regulatory information) they need to release. These safety codes do not have anythign to do with regulateing the business or monitoring it, therefore the government has no vested interest in control over it.
And what prevents an indie repair shop from buying a car (or getting one donated) and breaking it to see what error codes are produced when something goes wrong and then matching them up?
If it's cost, you better come up with something else because there is no law saying you have to be allowed to compete on the cheap.
Now, if they were being sued for doing that, then we would have a different story.
They aren't using their huge market share to lock out competitors. They are designing a product that functions in such a way that competitors can not service them. If you don't like it don't buy it. You have a choice.
But the government has no mandate to ensure that there is copetition, only to ensure that competitors do not abuse their positions.
That doesn't change the fact that this law is unreasonable. In the first case, it's understandable. You are waranteed against damage, but then you come to find out that the repair can only be done at the dealership (though to tell the truth, this doesn't seem any different from computer warantees. I'll have to look into it more). The fact is though, that the governemtn shouldn't be forcing businesses to do this. Just because you want to get your repair done somewhere doesn't give you the right. I would guess the case you are refering to had to do with the fact that having to have the repairs done at the dealership was not part of the original warantee contract.
If it was, all I can really say is read the waranty. A business has every right to make restrictions like that. And if you don't like it, then you don't buy it.
Why is this good? Why is the government stepping into private business matters and FORCING them to make things easier for their competition a good thing? A monopoly is not an inherrently bad thing, which is why the laws cover the ABUSE of a monopoly position. Until these manufacturers start abusing their positions, the government should keep itself out of this.
Actualy, you CAN discriminate based ont he market size or how the market works. A monopoly is not inherrently bad. THe laws cover the ABUSE of a monopoly.
A lot of it depends on the place, for example, my uncle owns a nightclub/bar which hosts live music almost every night, he has a couple regular bands that play and they perform and retain the full profits of their ticket sales because they almost always sell the place out and the money my uncle makes off selling food and drinks at those shows more than outwieghs the productions costs.
But yeah, in a lot of places, the band usualy pays some facility charge whether it's for crew or just the venue. The size of the location changes the cost too, a place that can only hold 50 people is going to be much less expensive to play at than a place that seats 300
There ARE people who run because they want to make things better. They do not get the monetary support that they need in order to compete with greedy, bribe-able politicians in the media, because they have scruples.
Where? Where are they? I haven't seen one. You see a couple of them at the local level, but I haven't seen a single one beyond that.
I'm not excusing anyone, I'm saying the problem we have is that the public sucks. These are the people we're electing to office because they are the best we have. And that's sad. We need to demand that our politicians hold our interests at heart, and when they don't get rid of them. Maybe then we can gain some ground. But the problem is, public interests are varried. There's no way to win because everyone is self serving. In otherwords, it's a vicious cycle.
I realized that after I posted, but there's no edit function for slashdot. But yes, that's not a better solution either.
I'm not quite sure what you're saying here.
Yes you have a right to use your computer without being spied on, but once you open a public port on a public network accessable to anyone for any reason, any information you display on that port is public information for anyone who cares to read it.
Well for us, to cost of recording a CD (Studio time, mixing, pressing etc) for our last CD came out to a bout $800 - $1,000. A lot of it depends on where you go and what equipment you use. We're currently talking with a local guy who has his own studio in his house (and we've listened to some stuff he's recorded already from it, so we've verified the quality) and we're looking at negotiating out a cheaper run, hopefuly about $600 total.
At $10 a CD, it would cost us between 80 and 100 CDs to recoup our last recording costs.
After any given concert, we sell maybe 5 or 10 CDs, and our sales outside of concerts are little or none.
The costs to perform can vary depending on where we go. Some places let us use the facility for free and we get back the full ticket price (usualy $5 a head, sometimes $8). Other places we perform at (like the local college) charge about $300 for 2 hours, but this includes a full sound crew as well. Usualy the concerts held there are a combination of ourselves and other groups, and we as the hosts pay the full facility charges, and get full profits, while the other groups get free advertising.
I should mention that we are a small a capella group, so we don't have much in the way of equipment costs. Our incomes don't rely on our sales (we all have jobs outside of this), but it's always nice to have extra income.
In all, we do this for fun, but obviously we have cost incurred and an interest in selling CDs and music (recording costs come out of our pockets untill we recoup the costs). It's obvious to us though that the CDs are not where the money is. People come to see and hear us perform. They like the concerts and the live sound. The recordings are mostly an extra feature.