If you want to get involved with sysadmin stuff then you should start by gaining the trust of the people who run your school systems.
In the end, it doesn't matter. Trusted or not, to blame or not, when something goes wrong, everyone's going to think it's your fault. Because you know something they don't and are therefore suspicious. If you want to avoid being blamed, then pretend to be as ignorant as everyone else.
I'm really struggling to find a parallel between your scenarios and what happened to these kids. I'm really struggling.
How about this scenario:
You give a friend permission to sleep on your couch. However, they are only allowed to do it between the hours of 9 and 5 and they are only allowed to sleep on the couch. You come home at 6 o'clock and find them sitting on the couch, in breach of all your rules. So you charge them with trespass.
These children were given laptops by an education institution that their parents were funding. The school would not let them get an education without these laptops. These laptops reported everything the students did back to the school administration, and they were forced to use them. They disabled the surveillance software.
After that, they did a number of different things. But that's not hugely important, because that's not what they're being charged for. They are being charged for stopping a computer, paid for by their parents, that they were forced to use in order to get an education that was theirs by rights, spying on them.
How exactly is that equivelant to stealing a wallet, breaking and entering or rape?
The CDs that won't play in certain computers are examples of either defective discs or defective drives.
Or of attempted copy protection mechanisms that deliberately fail to work in situations where they can be digitally duplicated. Ok, technically those discs aren't CDs, as they don't conform to the standard, but they are still marketed as such, and ordinary consumers don't know the difference.
Region locks are good, too. Now that movie that was not LEGAL to own in Japan (example pulled out of nowhere) suddenly is rather difficult to PLAY in Japan, as well.
They might accomplish that, but what they also accomplish is preventing me from playing a movie that I legally purchased and imported. As a reasonably common example, many anime fans import Japanese discs that have not been picked up by US companies for distribution, which is perfectly legal. Or a Dad might go on a trip to the US and bring back a couple of DVDs for his kids, that don't work on their local player.
Then go to the library and borrow the CD - as long as the DRM-encumbered item is offered in addition to CDs and tapes, this isn't a problem.
The issue of backwards compatibility is always present with any technological change. Your comment is analagous to saying that the local library should not stock audiobooks in CDs, because you only have a tape player in your car. Time changes, technology marches ever onwards, and in a few years time, new car sound systems will be able to play DRM-protected content.
For the time being, enjoy your easy-to-get audiobooks at home, drop by the library to pick up your more compatible CD audiobooks, and hang on until we get through the transitional period between technologies.
As far as I know, before this no libraries offered downloadable audiobooks to borrowers. They offered CDs and tapes. This new digital DRM-encumbered offering is equivelant in terms of redistributability (is that a word?) to the old content.
As I said in another reply to my comment, perhaps a better why of phrasing it is no additional restrictions, rather than no artificial restrictions. These digital objects are no more restricted than their physical counterparts.
All in all, a library with this offering is making more available than a library without it. No, it probably won't run on anything other than a PC*. But, if the new way of doing things isn't convenient for you, you can still do it the old fashioned way. It might not be perfect, but its a step better than it was before.
*And, for a public library, that's probably wrong. They should use an open standard for things running off public moneys. Maybe you Americans should start pushing for an official division of OS and State, in the same way as for religion:)
Perhaps I used poor terminology. I should say that the DRM used in this scenario creates no additional restrictions - it creates digital objects that have the same restrictions as their physical counterparts. Provided there are no irritating side-effects to this restriction, I don't have a problem with it. What I object to is when a digital object is DRM-encumbered in such a way that it is more restricted than it's physical counterpart - like CDs that won't play in certain computers, or DVDs that cannot be played in a country other than that which they are purchased in.
It may be, as you imply with your analogy, that the old way is passing away, and soon we'll all enjoy infinitely redistributable content. But I wouldn't bet on it. Schemes to artificially limit demand (which is essentially what DRM, copyright, and all that jazz is) are generally successful and sustainable for the ones implementing it - that's why there are anti-trust laws against some instances of it. If it was something that would intrinsically fail, it wouldn't need to be regulated. I'm afraid the current model of licensing and artificial scarcity is going to be with us for a while.
You mention the DRM is easily circumventable. And it is. But then, its just as easy to duplicate the current audiobooks being distributed on tape and CD. But if the DRM can keep the duplication down to the level previously experienced with tapes and CDs, then the content providers can't really complain. And in the meantime, borrowers get the convenience of borrowing from the comfort of their own homes. Win/win. If only all DRM scenarios worked like this.
This is actually one of the few types of DRM that I can actually see as being worthwhile. That is, a type of DRM that emulates the current, physical limitations of property in digital space rather than manufacturing artificial restrictions.
This sort of feature makes libraries more accessible, without lmiting the borrowers any more than the previous system. If this is the sort of thing DRM is going to be used for, then good for it. I doubt it though.
The thief in this instance sent all his information to a third party. If that third party has no privacy policy (and I assume the site in this story does not) then he has no expectation that any of the information he sent be kept confidential. His IP, of course, is definately not private.
So, the lesson to be learned is to not send anything to a third party that you want kept private. At least, not unless that third party is bound by law or policy to keep your information private.
If the investigators in this story had hacked into the guys computer, or even used some feature of the stolen phone to track him down, then I might buy your argument. But at no point did they require any information that was not recorded in their own records. The encrypted information they cracked did not contain any personal information. All it did was tell them the time at which the user accessed their website. They then went through their standard logs, found a record that matched the time, and discovered his IP address. Which they used to track him down by comparing it to the list of users that visited their forums.
The only possibly dubious action here is the decrypting of the data that contained the phones ID number. But if you or I were to use that site, knowing our phones ID number means nothing. They could find yoru IP just as easily by browsing through their logs. The encrypted ID number is only useful in tracking someone down through this system if you *already know it*. So if the operators of this site know your phone's ID number, yes, they could track you down if you use their site. But they're not going to know it, are they? Unless, that is, it's really their phone your using, in which case they know it damn well.
Then, on the other hand, there are certain stars that seem to attract a following. For example, my Mum will probably go see the next Julia Roberts movie, based largely on the fact that Julia Roberts will star in it, and she has liked previous Julia Roberts movies. My brother likes action movies, so films like Kindergarten Cop got him to watch because they contained a familiar name, even if it wasn't really the genre he was into. I know other people who like Robin Williams, and give every movie he makes a shot.
I suppose the difference is that these actors aren't really just the star of the season - they've made a bunch of movies before, and people who liked most of the previous movies will probably go see the new film based on the strength of the star's past record.
See, when I saw this, I thought it was cool. Not because it was all wonderfully clean, green and good for the environment, but because it sounded easier for me.
I can have a nice little fireplace in my house without having to construct a chimney. I can have a smokeless fire, which is always nice. I can turn it on with a switch, and I don't have to spend time and money buying and splitting firewood. The only downside seems to be no glowing embers to look at.
Then again, on the environmental note, 220v coming from a commercial power plant is probably cleaner than the equivelant amount of wood being burnt, if you care about that sort of thing. And if this sort of device replaces fireplaces (can't see it happening, but let's just say) then if and when our industrial coal-powered plants are switched to a cleaner method, then all our fireplaces automagically become environmentally friendly. Whereas on the other hand, if we still had our normal wood-fed fires, we'd still be burning up trees and pumping smoke up our chimneys.
All that said, for $50k I'd buy a nice new atmosphere-polluting car, and pay off a nice chunk of my mortgage rather than buy a fancy new gadget.
No they won't. They won't say one damn thing about whose fault it is. All they'll say is their policy doesn't cover you if you don't take all reasonable measures to prevent it. That isn't assigning fault.
Actually, those are two seperate verses. If you really wanna take the bible out of context, my favourite is: "Was not Rahab the prostitute judged righteous for what she did?"
Irony is a state of affairs or an event that seems deliberately contrary to what one expects and is often amusing as a result.
The New Oxford English Dictionary
From the site you linked to. Somebody making mispelling superior while claiming to besuperior is definately contrary to expectations.
I can float a table to the right of the page, I can whack on a position absolute and stick it wherever I want.
You're right about divs and tables having different logical meanings; but the reality is, pretty much no browser pays any attention at all to the logical meaning of the tags. And I know more people who use Mac IE than who use screen readers. Hell, I know more people who use lynx on a regular basis than who use screen readers.
Your method is much better in theory. But in practical reality, nobodys going to use it until it's fixed. There's no logical reason why vertical-align should render only on table cells. Fix these, and other odd discrepancies, wait a few years for major browser compatibility, and your method will be not only a better method, but a viable one too. But for now - tables it is.
The ability to subpoena a teenager is insignificant next to the power of the MPAA
Your sad devotion to that ancient business method has not helped you conjure up the stolen music, or given you clairvoyance enough to tell the difference between a technophobic grandmother and a music pirate.
1) Wonderful, if you're writing for yourself. I'm not, and depending on who I'm writing for, a considerable proportion of the audience, and maybe the client themselves, uses Mac IE. Try explaining to a very untech-savvy Mac user why the website your charging $4,000 for doesn't render correctly in their browser.
2) Eh? How's that? You have your content inside a div. I have mine inside a td. Because my td is styled using CSS, I can alter it's appearance through CSS, without touching the HTML. Put any style you like on your divs, I can replicate it on my td without changing the structureof the HTML.
<div id="outer">
<div id="middle">
<div id="inner">
any text
any height
any content, for example generated from DB
everything is vertically centered
</div>
</div> </div>
#middle {position: absolute; top: 50%;}/* for explorer only*/ #middle[id] {display: table-cell; vertical-align: middle; position: static;}
#inner {position: relative; top: -50%}/* for explorer only *//* optional: #inner[id] {position: static;} */ </style>
beats:
<table>
<tr>
<td class="center">
This is centered
</td>
</tr> </table>.class { veritcal-align: center; }
for maintanability and simplicity. Avoiding tables makes more work in some cases. Note that your example only works for fixed-height elements. Also note that it doesn't work for IE Mac.
I use tables to present tabular data too. But I also use tables to layout my site when the only alternative is horrific CSS kludges.
Example: try vertically aligning elements using CSS. The vertical-align tag is only valid in something rendered as a table cell. Firefox allows display: table-cell;, IE doesn't.
If you want something vertically aligned, don't use CSS. Use a table. I would *love* to stop using tables for anything but tabulated content, but CSS Positioning requires far too many awful hacks when you start talking complicated designs. Tables are simple and well-supported by most mainstream browsers.
This was just one example; there are others. Try creating a footer at the bottom of your page. (bottom: 0px; does not work on all browsers reliably).
I *like* the concept of CSS. But it's just not all together yet.
I didnt say it didnt have any asides, I said it didnt have any absurdist insides. Half of the humour rom HHG is from asides that have only tangential relevance to the rest of the story. "Beware of the Tiger" sign. Babelfish and God. The army of battleships eaten by a small dog. The quantum physics aside in Dirk Gently was used because the book later discusses it in other areas, and the characters are used to discuss it to give the reader a basic foundation.
And the crazy dude was Irish - hence the pun about "my Ireland". Pretty much everyone in the film apart from him was Scottish though, so you do get some points.
Slashdot Mirror
If you want to get involved with sysadmin stuff then you should start by gaining the trust of the people who run your school systems.
In the end, it doesn't matter. Trusted or not, to blame or not, when something goes wrong, everyone's going to think it's your fault. Because you know something they don't and are therefore suspicious. If you want to avoid being blamed, then pretend to be as ignorant as everyone else.
I'm really struggling to find a parallel between your scenarios and what happened to these kids. I'm really struggling.
How about this scenario:
You give a friend permission to sleep on your couch. However, they are only allowed to do it between the hours of 9 and 5 and they are only allowed to sleep on the couch. You come home at 6 o'clock and find them sitting on the couch, in breach of all your rules. So you charge them with trespass.
These children were given laptops by an education institution that their parents were funding. The school would not let them get an education without these laptops. These laptops reported everything the students did back to the school administration, and they were forced to use them. They disabled the surveillance software.
After that, they did a number of different things. But that's not hugely important, because that's not what they're being charged for. They are being charged for stopping a computer, paid for by their parents, that they were forced to use in order to get an education that was theirs by rights, spying on them.
How exactly is that equivelant to stealing a wallet, breaking and entering or rape?
The CDs that won't play in certain computers are examples of either defective discs or defective drives.
Or of attempted copy protection mechanisms that deliberately fail to work in situations where they can be digitally duplicated. Ok, technically those discs aren't CDs, as they don't conform to the standard, but they are still marketed as such, and ordinary consumers don't know the difference.
Region locks are good, too. Now that movie that was not LEGAL to own in Japan (example pulled out of nowhere) suddenly is rather difficult to PLAY in Japan, as well.
They might accomplish that, but what they also accomplish is preventing me from playing a movie that I legally purchased and imported. As a reasonably common example, many anime fans import Japanese discs that have not been picked up by US companies for distribution, which is perfectly legal. Or a Dad might go on a trip to the US and bring back a couple of DVDs for his kids, that don't work on their local player.
Then go to the library and borrow the CD - as long as the DRM-encumbered item is offered in addition to CDs and tapes, this isn't a problem.
The issue of backwards compatibility is always present with any technological change. Your comment is analagous to saying that the local library should not stock audiobooks in CDs, because you only have a tape player in your car. Time changes, technology marches ever onwards, and in a few years time, new car sound systems will be able to play DRM-protected content.
For the time being, enjoy your easy-to-get audiobooks at home, drop by the library to pick up your more compatible CD audiobooks, and hang on until we get through the transitional period between technologies.
As far as I know, before this no libraries offered downloadable audiobooks to borrowers. They offered CDs and tapes. This new digital DRM-encumbered offering is equivelant in terms of redistributability (is that a word?) to the old content.
:)
As I said in another reply to my comment, perhaps a better why of phrasing it is no additional restrictions, rather than no artificial restrictions. These digital objects are no more restricted than their physical counterparts.
All in all, a library with this offering is making more available than a library without it. No, it probably won't run on anything other than a PC*. But, if the new way of doing things isn't convenient for you, you can still do it the old fashioned way. It might not be perfect, but its a step better than it was before.
*And, for a public library, that's probably wrong. They should use an open standard for things running off public moneys. Maybe you Americans should start pushing for an official division of OS and State, in the same way as for religion
Perhaps I used poor terminology. I should say that the DRM used in this scenario creates no additional restrictions - it creates digital objects that have the same restrictions as their physical counterparts. Provided there are no irritating side-effects to this restriction, I don't have a problem with it. What I object to is when a digital object is DRM-encumbered in such a way that it is more restricted than it's physical counterpart - like CDs that won't play in certain computers, or DVDs that cannot be played in a country other than that which they are purchased in.
It may be, as you imply with your analogy, that the old way is passing away, and soon we'll all enjoy infinitely redistributable content. But I wouldn't bet on it. Schemes to artificially limit demand (which is essentially what DRM, copyright, and all that jazz is) are generally successful and sustainable for the ones implementing it - that's why there are anti-trust laws against some instances of it. If it was something that would intrinsically fail, it wouldn't need to be regulated. I'm afraid the current model of licensing and artificial scarcity is going to be with us for a while.
Audiobooks... I can't figure out what the problem is with reading...
It's hard to see on-coming traffic while doing it.
You mention the DRM is easily circumventable. And it is. But then, its just as easy to duplicate the current audiobooks being distributed on tape and CD. But if the DRM can keep the duplication down to the level previously experienced with tapes and CDs, then the content providers can't really complain. And in the meantime, borrowers get the convenience of borrowing from the comfort of their own homes. Win/win. If only all DRM scenarios worked like this.
This is actually one of the few types of DRM that I can actually see as being worthwhile. That is, a type of DRM that emulates the current, physical limitations of property in digital space rather than manufacturing artificial restrictions.
This sort of feature makes libraries more accessible, without lmiting the borrowers any more than the previous system. If this is the sort of thing DRM is going to be used for, then good for it. I doubt it though.
The thief in this instance sent all his information to a third party. If that third party has no privacy policy (and I assume the site in this story does not) then he has no expectation that any of the information he sent be kept confidential. His IP, of course, is definately not private.
So, the lesson to be learned is to not send anything to a third party that you want kept private. At least, not unless that third party is bound by law or policy to keep your information private.
If the investigators in this story had hacked into the guys computer, or even used some feature of the stolen phone to track him down, then I might buy your argument. But at no point did they require any information that was not recorded in their own records. The encrypted information they cracked did not contain any personal information. All it did was tell them the time at which the user accessed their website. They then went through their standard logs, found a record that matched the time, and discovered his IP address. Which they used to track him down by comparing it to the list of users that visited their forums.
The only possibly dubious action here is the decrypting of the data that contained the phones ID number. But if you or I were to use that site, knowing our phones ID number means nothing. They could find yoru IP just as easily by browsing through their logs. The encrypted ID number is only useful in tracking someone down through this system if you *already know it*. So if the operators of this site know your phone's ID number, yes, they could track you down if you use their site. But they're not going to know it, are they? Unless, that is, it's really their phone your using, in which case they know it damn well.
Then, on the other hand, there are certain stars that seem to attract a following. For example, my Mum will probably go see the next Julia Roberts movie, based largely on the fact that Julia Roberts will star in it, and she has liked previous Julia Roberts movies. My brother likes action movies, so films like Kindergarten Cop got him to watch because they contained a familiar name, even if it wasn't really the genre he was into. I know other people who like Robin Williams, and give every movie he makes a shot.
I suppose the difference is that these actors aren't really just the star of the season - they've made a bunch of movies before, and people who liked most of the previous movies will probably go see the new film based on the strength of the star's past record.
See, when I saw this, I thought it was cool. Not because it was all wonderfully clean, green and good for the environment, but because it sounded easier for me.
I can have a nice little fireplace in my house without having to construct a chimney. I can have a smokeless fire, which is always nice. I can turn it on with a switch, and I don't have to spend time and money buying and splitting firewood. The only downside seems to be no glowing embers to look at.
Then again, on the environmental note, 220v coming from a commercial power plant is probably cleaner than the equivelant amount of wood being burnt, if you care about that sort of thing. And if this sort of device replaces fireplaces (can't see it happening, but let's just say) then if and when our industrial coal-powered plants are switched to a cleaner method, then all our fireplaces automagically become environmentally friendly. Whereas on the other hand, if we still had our normal wood-fed fires, we'd still be burning up trees and pumping smoke up our chimneys.
All that said, for $50k I'd buy a nice new atmosphere-polluting car, and pay off a nice chunk of my mortgage rather than buy a fancy new gadget.
A kettle? Exactly what part gets boiled?
No they won't. They won't say one damn thing about whose fault it is. All they'll say is their policy doesn't cover you if you don't take all reasonable measures to prevent it. That isn't assigning fault.
Actually, those are two seperate verses. If you really wanna take the bible out of context, my favourite is: "Was not Rahab the prostitute judged righteous for what she did?"
Irony is a state of affairs or an event that seems deliberately contrary to what one expects and is often amusing as a result. The New Oxford English Dictionary
From the site you linked to. Somebody making mispelling superior while claiming to besuperior is definately contrary to expectations.
Signature: Ironic (Possibly because of poor spelling)
Guess what: not compatible with IE.
I can float a table to the right of the page, I can whack on a position absolute and stick it wherever I want.
You're right about divs and tables having different logical meanings; but the reality is, pretty much no browser pays any attention at all to the logical meaning of the tags. And I know more people who use Mac IE than who use screen readers. Hell, I know more people who use lynx on a regular basis than who use screen readers.
Your method is much better in theory. But in practical reality, nobodys going to use it until it's fixed. There's no logical reason why vertical-align should render only on table cells. Fix these, and other odd discrepancies, wait a few years for major browser compatibility, and your method will be not only a better method, but a viable one too. But for now - tables it is.
The ability to subpoena a teenager is insignificant next to the power of the MPAA
Your sad devotion to that ancient business method has not helped you conjure up the stolen music, or given you clairvoyance enough to tell the difference between a technophobic grandmother and a music pirate.
1) Wonderful, if you're writing for yourself. I'm not, and depending on who I'm writing for, a considerable proportion of the audience, and maybe the client themselves, uses Mac IE. Try explaining to a very untech-savvy Mac user why the website your charging $4,000 for doesn't render correctly in their browser.
2) Eh? How's that? You have your content inside a div. I have mine inside a td. Because my td is styled using CSS, I can alter it's appearance through CSS, without touching the HTML. Put any style you like on your divs, I can replicate it on my td without changing the structureof the HTML.
I fail to see how:
/* for explorer only*/
/* for explorer only */ /* optional: #inner[id] {position: static;} */
.class { veritcal-align: center; }
<div id="outer">
<div id="middle">
<div id="inner">
any text
any height
any content, for example generated from DB
everything is vertically centered
</div>
</div>
</div>
<style type="text/css">
#outer {height: 400px; overflow: hidden; position: relative;}
#outer[id] {display: table; position: static;}
#middle {position: absolute; top: 50%;}
#middle[id] {display: table-cell; vertical-align: middle; position: static;}
#inner {position: relative; top: -50%}
</style>
beats:
<table>
<tr>
<td class="center">
This is centered
</td>
</tr>
</table>
for maintanability and simplicity. Avoiding tables makes more work in some cases. Note that your example only works for fixed-height elements. Also note that it doesn't work for IE Mac.
I use tables to present tabular data too. But I also use tables to layout my site when the only alternative is horrific CSS kludges.
Example: try vertically aligning elements using CSS. The vertical-align tag is only valid in something rendered as a table cell. Firefox allows display: table-cell;, IE doesn't.
If you want something vertically aligned, don't use CSS. Use a table. I would *love* to stop using tables for anything but tabulated content, but CSS Positioning requires far too many awful hacks when you start talking complicated designs. Tables are simple and well-supported by most mainstream browsers.
This was just one example; there are others. Try creating a footer at the bottom of your page. (bottom: 0px; does not work on all browsers reliably).
I *like* the concept of CSS. But it's just not all together yet.
I didnt say it didnt have any asides, I said it didnt have any absurdist insides. Half of the humour rom HHG is from asides that have only tangential relevance to the rest of the story. "Beware of the Tiger" sign. Babelfish and God. The army of battleships eaten by a small dog. The quantum physics aside in Dirk Gently was used because the book later discusses it in other areas, and the characters are used to discuss it to give the reader a basic foundation.
And the crazy dude was Irish - hence the pun about "my Ireland". Pretty much everyone in the film apart from him was Scottish though, so you do get some points.