The laptop is the only magnet, and I offer a couple of pointers from my own experience, and that of people close to me:
Awareness of your person and surrounding - pocket-picking relies on you not paying attention. Or at least, not much attention.
Keep important things in zip-up and/or internal pockets, and don't allow jackets to flap
Use a laptop bag with a shoulder strap, and hook and arm through the strap into a pocket - prevents snatching quite well
Keep to areas with plenty of other people, and when waiting, especially in a less busy area, have your back right to a wall - prevents opportunism. The back to a wall thing, however, can make things worse in very empty areas, especially if you extend it to a corner.
I'm frankly amazed they bid cheaper, but we don't know all the details. We already have the kit (that belongs to Lancaster and Kent unis), and the software (that too), and the mirroring agreements and existing data (they don't get copies of that, either).
However, AIUI (I wasn't involved in the tendering), we wanted to continue adding value to the mirror service, make it more reliable, more easy to use, offering more advanced access systems, and lots of cool features. I believe the winning tender was single-site, bare-bones service, from a JISC 'Strategic Partner'.
Oh, and tenders don't have to go to the lowest bidder. When UKMS formed, it had a slightly more expensive bid than the competition, but the promise of added-value and dual-site operation won us the day. I wasn't there then, either, but I've been told by the folks that were.
Until very recently, I worked at mirror.ac.uk part-time (I'm even still on staff page, if you know where to find it).
I don't think many people realise how much effort has gone into developing and improving the mirror service. The service has always been a love of much of the staff, and we're all sad to see it go (and not just because it's costing us jobs). Like any lover, it's been a painful journey - intractible hardware, elusive bugs, the JANET core network doing strange things - but it's all be fun.
Most of my work was stuff you didn't see - helping work on backend stability, hardware maintenance, the indexer for the search engine (yes, blame me, but the engine itself was someone else's), and reporting data to the funders.
Another often-overlooked point is the fact that we are so much more than a mirror service - a customised and effective search engine, a browsing interface that lets you look inside many archive and package formats (including RPMs and DEBs), and e even offer users support and assistance.
So I for one will be sad to see it go, and will hold a wake on the day of shutdown (I'll be inviting my former workmates).
As a legal professional, how do you see the evolution of the laws surrounding the internet progressing? We have heard much talk of losing our online liberties - what do you think the real threats to a reasonable internet are?
Although it should be noted that this individual student almost certainly does not have any control over the DNS, so the naming of the machine must have had co-operation from the IT Powers That Be at MIT.
Isn't there something in the GPL to prevent offensive attack uses of software?
Absolutely not! It's free, and it meets the OSI's Open Source Definition, which means that it must not restrict use by any individual or group. Just like a free/open license cannot have clauses like "must not be used for genocide"
The whole point is that we don't tell people what they can and can't use free software for.
Well, they are litigating against IBM, and in the case of SGI they are claiming that SGI are in material breach of their pre-existing license, which is nearly the same thing.
1) The offending, potentially infringing code is being removed.
IMMATERIAL. You cannot just "take back" code and say everything is OK.
However, under copyright law, normal legal practices, and their license agreements, SCO is obliged to attempt to deal with things without litigation, get the code removed, find a mutually acceptable solution. They have made no such good-faith efforts, whatsoever.
2) That code may well have been in the public domain anyway.
MAY HAVE BEEN, according to SGI. However they were concerned enough to remove the code.
It's probably LaTeX, which can be prepared from your favourite text editor, and rendered to print or PDF (or postscript) by entirely open-source software.
The problem with the bolt on approach is that there is no consistency of use in the Unix framework. You can add Kerberos but you have to separately Kerberize every application. Same for integration to a domain server or any other infrastructure.
I feel you are either miseducated in the matter, or a very good troll - I'll assume the former.
The issue of whether or not things are 'integrated into the core' is a good example of the key design philosophy difference between UNIX-type OSs, and MS OSs, although I was given the impression that MS OSs were going more towards UNIX in this regard. The UNIX design philosophy is to keep everything seperate, with well-defined means for different components to interract. This is especially well epitomised by the HURD MKA (micro-kernel architecture), but is also seen in every UNIX-derivative OS. Kerberos is a bolt-on, but then so is the mechanism for user logins, and email, and command interpretation (shells). It is up to whoever sets the system up, be they a sysadmin or a distro maintainer, to 'tightly integrate' them as much as desired, thus allowing a UNIX/linux box to use NIS/LDAP/Kerberos/whatever as a cetralised authentication system. Many linux distros give the option of using a Windows NT domain as an authorisation service, if the user so desires.
Well, I must say that I've never met Mustafa at work... the people who run the UK Mirror Service are, however, there for all to see on the UKMS Crew Page
In all seriousness, you have until some time tonight (on BST, which is UTC+1) before we should be fully synced, including any files that have been pulled, with the source site. There are some exceptions, but I don't think they will apply in this case. And if any files were compromised, they are compromised on our servers as well.
WARNING: SHAMELESS PLUG: If you are a fan of the Mirror Service, or even just a user, please note the message on our homepage, as we are about to be able to serve even more users, at higher speeds.
It's the British spelling, primarily, although from what I understand of patterns of UK vs USA English, it is probably quite likely used in many/most English speaking countries.
I think it's fairly obvious from the pronunciation, really.
Getting one of those stupid SCO letters isn't on my agenda, considering that I'd have to go to court and I don't, at the time, live in America.
I fail to see how they can really harm you without some better evidence - international civil cases are notoriously hard to bring, it's more likely they'd file suit against you in the states, which would do pretty much nothing.
If they really want to hurt you, they would need to bring suit in whichever country you're in, AIUI. IANAL.
If it is true, then you haven't done your homework very well. File dialog is purely aesthetic, and there are many in use. PCI modem support is hard to reverse engineer for software modems - PCI true hardware modems will Just Work. As with windows there is a choice of screensavers... need I go on?
That said, you do mention a couple of issues which are valid for the novice user and limit the uptake of Open Source environments on the consumer desktop.
That's odd, as as a physicist I know that we can never 'prove' a theory (can't prove a positive), only disprove it (ie prove the negative).
Furthermore, in predicate elgebra one can always form a negative from a positive (the 'null hypothesis'), and vice versa, and if one is proved the other is disproved (etc etc), so anytime you prove a positive you are proving a negative (and vice versa).
Thus to say it is 'impossible to prove a negative' is clearly nonsensical. However, please feel free to give me references and citations to contradcict me.
Suppose a not so friendly government gets to run the country for a few years and does want to track the movement of cash.
Well, that's changing the goal posts, but two points - one, they'd have to do it Europe-wide, and secondly such an unscrupulous government could add the tags anyway, we just make it a little easier
I don't like walking around with a big sign on me saying I've got 100 euro's in my pocket for everyone with a cute little scanner.
Well, they'd have to get pretty damn close, but apart from that, this is a valid concern. It'll probably lead to people carrying less cash in pretty short order.
That survey is of course meaningless unless we can link it to peoples pre-existant deployment plans. If they weren't planning to deploy linux anyway, it doesn't mean much.
Just an obvious point - it's still better than a lot of people saying that they plan to stop using it.
the EU may implant RFID tags into the Euro, basically eliminating the anonymous cash transaction.
How does this stop anything being anonymous? Are people going to ask for ID every time you buy everything and enter it into a DB? What about the thousands of establishments that won't bother with the RFID reader as many currently don't bother with a UV lamp? There won't be a 'data trail' to follow back to the cash machine, and I doubt the cash machines would even scan the notes on the way out (after all, they already know they aren't fake).
It surely depends entirely on exactly how they are used in the warehouse. If every product is individually tagged, then many of the potential problems that are postulated for retail use still occur, albeit less easily.
If, however, they are using them as an alternative to barcoding on each crate (which is what the article suggests), then there is nothing unfortunate about this, and it strikes me as a perfectly good use of a technology which is not inherently evil.
Slashdot Mirror
Let's see...
That's off the top of my head. It's the usual way people compete, after all.
PS: Opera isn't open source, btw
The laptop is the only magnet, and I offer a couple of pointers from my own experience, and that of people close to me:
Really, every little helps.
And here's more from the horse's mouth...
I'm frankly amazed they bid cheaper, but we don't know all the details. We already have the kit (that belongs to Lancaster and Kent unis), and the software (that too), and the mirroring agreements and existing data (they don't get copies of that, either).
However, AIUI (I wasn't involved in the tendering), we wanted to continue adding value to the mirror service, make it more reliable, more easy to use, offering more advanced access systems, and lots of cool features. I believe the winning tender was single-site, bare-bones service, from a JISC 'Strategic Partner'.
Oh, and tenders don't have to go to the lowest bidder. When UKMS formed, it had a slightly more expensive bid than the competition, but the promise of added-value and dual-site operation won us the day. I wasn't there then, either, but I've been told by the folks that were.
SamBC
Here, here.
Until very recently, I worked at mirror.ac.uk part-time (I'm even still on staff page, if you know where to find it).
I don't think many people realise how much effort has gone into developing and improving the mirror service. The service has always been a love of much of the staff, and we're all sad to see it go (and not just because it's costing us jobs). Like any lover, it's been a painful journey - intractible hardware, elusive bugs, the JANET core network doing strange things - but it's all be fun.
Most of my work was stuff you didn't see - helping work on backend stability, hardware maintenance, the indexer for the search engine (yes, blame me, but the engine itself was someone else's), and reporting data to the funders.
Another often-overlooked point is the fact that we are so much more than a mirror service - a customised and effective search engine, a browsing interface that lets you look inside many archive and package formats (including RPMs and DEBs), and e even offer users support and assistance.
So I for one will be sad to see it go, and will hold a wake on the day of shutdown (I'll be inviting my former workmates).
Sam
As a legal professional, how do you see the evolution of the laws surrounding the internet progressing? We have heard much talk of losing our online liberties - what do you think the real threats to a reasonable internet are?
Hey, what are "inside sales", and how do they relate to SCO's "IP campaigns"?
This whole jobs page seems kinda revealing...
Can they really? My experience with windows update is that it only downloads and install temporarily.
If you know of a way to do what you say, please, please, tell me.
Although it should be noted that this individual student almost certainly does not have any control over the DNS, so the naming of the machine must have had co-operation from the IT Powers That Be at MIT.
Isn't there something in the GPL to prevent offensive attack uses of software?
Absolutely not! It's free, and it meets the OSI's Open Source Definition, which means that it must not restrict use by any individual or group. Just like a free/open license cannot have clauses like "must not be used for genocide"
The whole point is that we don't tell people what they can and can't use free software for.
Well, they are litigating against IBM, and in the case of SGI they are claiming that SGI are in material breach of their pre-existing license, which is nearly the same thing.
1) The offending, potentially infringing code is being removed.
IMMATERIAL. You cannot just "take back" code and say everything is OK.
However, under copyright law, normal legal practices, and their license agreements, SCO is obliged to attempt to deal with things without litigation, get the code removed, find a mutually acceptable solution. They have made no such good-faith efforts, whatsoever.
2) That code may well have been in the public domain anyway.
MAY HAVE BEEN, according to SGI. However they were concerned enough to remove the code.
Better safe than sorry.
It's probably LaTeX, which can be prepared from your favourite text editor, and rendered to print or PDF (or postscript) by entirely open-source software.
It's very nice.
It's TDMA, I believe. So yes, it is a standard, just not Bluetooth.
Unless, of course, you use PAM
Sam
I feel you are either miseducated in the matter, or a very good troll - I'll assume the former.
The issue of whether or not things are 'integrated into the core' is a good example of the key design philosophy difference between UNIX-type OSs, and MS OSs, although I was given the impression that MS OSs were going more towards UNIX in this regard. The UNIX design philosophy is to keep everything seperate, with well-defined means for different components to interract. This is especially well epitomised by the HURD MKA (micro-kernel architecture), but is also seen in every UNIX-derivative OS. Kerberos is a bolt-on, but then so is the mechanism for user logins, and email, and command interpretation (shells). It is up to whoever sets the system up, be they a sysadmin or a distro maintainer, to 'tightly integrate' them as much as desired, thus allowing a UNIX/linux box to use NIS/LDAP/Kerberos/whatever as a cetralised authentication system. Many linux distros give the option of using a Windows NT domain as an authorisation service, if the user so desires.
However, I will agree with you on complacency.
Sam
Well, I must say that I've never met Mustafa at work... the people who run the UK Mirror Service are, however, there for all to see on the UKMS Crew Page
In all seriousness, you have until some time tonight (on BST, which is UTC+1) before we should be fully synced, including any files that have been pulled, with the source site. There are some exceptions, but I don't think they will apply in this case. And if any files were compromised, they are compromised on our servers as well.
WARNING: SHAMELESS PLUG: If you are a fan of the Mirror Service, or even just a user, please note the message on our homepage, as we are about to be able to serve even more users, at higher speeds.
It's the British spelling, primarily, although from what I understand of patterns of UK vs USA English, it is probably quite likely used in many/most English speaking countries.
I think it's fairly obvious from the pronunciation, really.
16x9. Not 16"x19". That's the aspect ration, the shape of the screen.
If they really want to hurt you, they would need to bring suit in whichever country you're in, AIUI. IANAL.
If it is true, then you haven't done your homework very well. File dialog is purely aesthetic, and there are many in use. PCI modem support is hard to reverse engineer for software modems - PCI true hardware modems will Just Work. As with windows there is a choice of screensavers... need I go on?
That said, you do mention a couple of issues which are valid for the novice user and limit the uptake of Open Source environments on the consumer desktop.
That's odd, as as a physicist I know that we can never 'prove' a theory (can't prove a positive), only disprove it (ie prove the negative).
Furthermore, in predicate elgebra one can always form a negative from a positive (the 'null hypothesis'), and vice versa, and if one is proved the other is disproved (etc etc), so anytime you prove a positive you are proving a negative (and vice versa).
Thus to say it is 'impossible to prove a negative' is clearly nonsensical. However, please feel free to give me references and citations to contradcict me.
Suppose a not so friendly government gets to run the country for a few years and does want to track the movement of cash.
Well, that's changing the goal posts, but two points - one, they'd have to do it Europe-wide, and secondly such an unscrupulous government could add the tags anyway, we just make it a little easier
I don't like walking around with a big sign on me saying I've got 100 euro's in my pocket for everyone with a cute little scanner.
Well, they'd have to get pretty damn close, but apart from that, this is a valid concern. It'll probably lead to people carrying less cash in pretty short order.
That survey is of course meaningless unless we can link it to peoples pre-existant deployment plans. If they weren't planning to deploy linux anyway, it doesn't mean much.
Just an obvious point - it's still better than a lot of people saying that they plan to stop using it.
the EU may implant RFID tags into the Euro, basically eliminating the anonymous cash transaction.
How does this stop anything being anonymous? Are people going to ask for ID every time you buy everything and enter it into a DB? What about the thousands of establishments that won't bother with the RFID reader as many currently don't bother with a UV lamp? There won't be a 'data trail' to follow back to the cash machine, and I doubt the cash machines would even scan the notes on the way out (after all, they already know they aren't fake).
It surely depends entirely on exactly how they are used in the warehouse. If every product is individually tagged, then many of the potential problems that are postulated for retail use still occur, albeit less easily.
If, however, they are using them as an alternative to barcoding on each crate (which is what the article suggests), then there is nothing unfortunate about this, and it strikes me as a perfectly good use of a technology which is not inherently evil.