I believe it is the board of directors that get in trouble, if that veil is pierced. But GP is right. They might get off scott-free if they can afford the best legal defense.
True, but on the other hand Congress may decide that one or more of them has to take the fall (you know, so they can be seen to be doing their jobs.) The current CEO of Enron isn't winning any points in the media right now.
It's probably not a problem for you because you do it regularly. These systems generally look for unusual patterns. If you always log in from one IP, and then log in from a load of different ones, this is suspicious. If you log in from a lot of IPs regularly, logging in from a load of IPs on a geographically distant subnet might be flagged as suspicious, but logging in from ones on the networks that you regularly use probably isn't.
A reasonable assumption, but given how opaque many of Google's operations are it's hard to know for sure, and of course they can change their criteria at any time.
If you're just a psycho with a few people in the club they'll take you out like you're a Branch Davidian. If muslims never killed people or hijacked planes nobody would give a crap about them. To be fair, if the christians never had the crusades nobody would give a crap about them either.
I agree. I've heard it said that a cult becomes a religion when it begins to kill people outside its own membership.
If you're just a psycho with a few people in the club they'll take you out like you're a Branch Davidian. If muslims never killed people or hijacked planes nobody would give a crap about them. To be fair, if the christians never had the crusades nobody would give a crap about them either./quote?
I've heard it said that a cult becomes a religion when it begin to kill people outside its own membership.
If I create software that (somehow) gets a person killed, through an error of my own doing and not the user's, am I not responsible for it ? Pretend EULA's don't apply, just for the sake of argument.
Actually, no, you probably would not be. Put it like this: if engineers were to be held accountable for every mistake, nobody would be an engineer. Sure, if there were malicious intent on your part, you'd be in trouble, but if an engineer does make a mistake (we all do, nobody's perfect) and that mistake makes it out into the field, it's the organization, it's policies, and it's leadership that failed, and should be held responsible. The same thing applies to BP... their technical people did their jobs, but management failed bigtime.
If a group of executives create a corporation, whose actions cause great harm and financial distress to millions of people (forget the wildlife for now), don't you think the people behind the corporation should be held responsible?
Sure, and contrary to popular belief the defense afforded by the corporate veil is not absolute. In cases like this, it can and will be penetrated and there will be some jail time involved. The people at the top, unfortunately, can afford the best lawyers and usually find some technical people or middle management to take the fall for them. Sometimes they don't though... witness Enron.
Unfortunately you can't jail corporations, which are the only guilty part in this (no, a corporation and the people who run it are not the same thing). Ah, the joys of incorporating.
Depends. What our government can do is disband them, at least the parts and assets which are under our control, and sell off the assets. Furthermore, the corporate veil most certainly can be penetrated when the criminal acts are of sufficient magnitude. RICO if nothing else (BP certainly qualifies as a corrupt organization, so far as I'm concerned, and at $3.08/gallon for gasoline, they're racketeers.) The question is more one of whether there is sufficient political will to pull it off. Given our corporatist Congress, and our corporatist Supreme Court, I'm not holding my breath.
I can't believe that industries are allowed to do things like drill for oil underwater (which is complex and when failure can cost billions USD and human lives) without having set, tested plans in place in case of this sort of catastrophe.
They do! Hordes of lobbyists descending upon Washington the instant the accident hits the five o'clock news.
sorry but i've played this game before. the operators of that drill rig know damn well the heat is on them, and in classic form that are looking to blame management of BP because they know chumps like you will buy into it.
Who is more the fool... the fool, or the fool who hires him?
My thoughts were exactly that when I read this. But this is published in Nature photonics, it cannot be all fake. There is a possibility of incorrect experiments/conclusion, but it cannot be complete BS.
Sure it can. 99% of scientific experiments prove to be complete BS (which is, in and of itself, valuable... at least you know the approaches that don't work.) Whether this is pure fabrication, bad science, or just a failed experiment has yet to be determined.
I still don't get it. Could you use a car analogy?
Certainly. See, a Model-T entangles with a 1963 Corvette. The owner of the Corvette calls the cops on his cell phone over air. The Model-T's owner uses a landline.
Apparently there are liars and thieves everywhere but the thing in China especially is a lack of respect for intellectual property. Many just don't see it as severe as stealing physical property. But it will get better just like the Americans did. There was a time when Charles Dickens angrily accused Americans of stealing, and of course Americans' big brains don't remember that nowadays.
Huh? We're not talking about intellectual property here, you goofball, we're talking about intellectual honesty. Whether or not American publishers ripped off Charles Dickens is irrelevant in this context. Matter of fact, the public-at-large benefited by that violation of copyright law: it was only Dickens and his publisher that lost out. Conversely, when scientists are dishonest and lack the requisite ethics to perform good science, we all lose. Not that I'm picking solely on them: our efforts suffer from politics as well, however we seem to get more spectacular examples of scientific fraud out of China. Their cultural imperatives seem to be a disadvantage here.
For their sakes I hope I'm wrong because they'll find themselves heading down the garden path if they don't do something about it... on the other hand, this may just be a way to sabotage our researchers by making them waste their time trying to reproduce the un-reproducible.
That philosophy of his sounds exactly like bullying to me.
"Sometimes we only find the right balance by taking what we can get, and then backing off when a victim fights back".
Rapidly losing respect for this man. Shame - the books are (for the most part) great.
Some things may be good for society as a whole, yet very, very bad for certain members of that society. It's important to make that distinction, and I think he failed to do that. In an overall cultural context, yes, it's important to try new things and see if they work... but we already know the damage that can be caused to individuals by loss of privacy. There's no goddamn experiment to required to figure out that people can be hurt when organizations who collect private information fail to protect it. Period.
And for all you "information wants to be free" idiots out there, realize that when confidential information is released, usually somebody gets hurt. Now, we may find that acceptable if it's information about a corporation or government organization that is committing illegal acts, but this isn't the same thing. These are individuals who (foolishly, as it turns out) trusted a corporation to keep their secrets: there's no overriding social concern that can be used to justify the release of information that can cause someone to get ripped off, suffer identity theft, or worse. There just isn't.
Democracy has often been described as a "great experiment". Throughout history it has never been tried on as broad a scale as this one.
It still hasn't been tried, and there's a reason for that. In spite of much Presidential rhetoric about "this great Democracy of ours", and general ignorance of the subject by many people, the U.S. is not now, and has never been, a democracy. That's because our Founders were some pretty smart cookies who understood very clearly that true democracy cannot be trusted to work on any significant scale. And why is that? Because they also knew that We the People could not be trusted to cast our votes in a way that was good for all of us, and that democracy often tends to devolve into mob rule. Even so, much of their planning revolved around how to give voters the tools to grasp the bigger picture: our educational system for one, freedom of the press for another. All that was intended to produce educated, well-informed voters who would cast their votes wisely. That worked reasonably well for a long time, but the cracks are showing
Unfortunately for any form of self-government, people usually vote what they think is best for themselves, and the design of our representative republic tried to take that into account. The fundamental problem with such a system is that (sooner or later) those duly-elected representatives start voting only what is best for them, and warp the political system to the point where our influence over their decision-making is minimized. That's the state of affairs in our great "democracy" today. Who will watch the watchers indeed, and when you consider the amount of damage almost three hundred million of us have suffered at the hands of those 434 people in D.C., well, it's tragic, really, it is. But it was we who let them corrupt our educational system, it was we who have accepted an unprecedented (for us) level of media control.
So far as Facebook et. al. go, it's one thing to try something new, to experiment, push the envelope... but when you know up front that what you're doing is going to damage some number of your own customers, you really should take a step back. Facebook can't get out of this by claiming they didn't know what they were doing, that it was just an experiment. They've demonstrated that they don't give a damn about their users, and that means those users should also take a step back, decide if what Facebook has to offer is really worth it. That's good advice regarding online services in general, when you get right down to it.
It was basically made illegal because the content industry told our politicians that we'd be transformed into a Internet equivalent of a third world country otherwise.
Well, like most countries that are going down that road (like mine, the U.S.) what's actually going to happen is that we'll all become cultural backwaters. Anything that was good will be locked away, and anyone that tries to create anything new will be sued into oblivion.
The tragedy of all this is the number of perhaps well-meaning lawmakers who buy into content industry lies. There are also those who know exactly what is going on, know the damage they're causing, but do it anyway because they get paid for it. The entire industry is sick and really needs to be reined in on an international level, before they cause any more grief.
Slashdot Mirror
I believe it is the board of directors that get in trouble, if that veil is pierced. But GP is right. They might get off scott-free if they can afford the best legal defense.
True, but on the other hand Congress may decide that one or more of them has to take the fall (you know, so they can be seen to be doing their jobs.) The current CEO of Enron isn't winning any points in the media right now.
damn those subomains!!!!! damn them all to hell!!!!
Don't forget to provide proper attribution to Charltone Hestin.
If only they had someone who could deal with the god damn customers so the engineers wouldn't have to... someone with people skills...
Well, I'd say that Steve Jobs could help them there, but his reality-distortion field would skew the responses.
and it was like talking to badly programmed chatbots running on a steam-powered difference engine.
Hey, don't talk down the steam-powered difference engines. They're quite awesome, really.
Maybe so, but it was still hilarious.
It's probably not a problem for you because you do it regularly. These systems generally look for unusual patterns. If you always log in from one IP, and then log in from a load of different ones, this is suspicious. If you log in from a lot of IPs regularly, logging in from a load of IPs on a geographically distant subnet might be flagged as suspicious, but logging in from ones on the networks that you regularly use probably isn't.
A reasonable assumption, but given how opaque many of Google's operations are it's hard to know for sure, and of course they can change their criteria at any time.
According to the OED the plural of forum is forums. Fora is only use when referring to Roman public spaces.
True, and this all sounds like A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Forum.
When Symbolics takes a research project, makes it proprietary, and then proceeds to kill it?
Any post containing a reference to Symbolics deserves an automatic +5.
Just out of curiosity, who or what was Symbolics? I supposed I could Google it.
If you're just a psycho with a few people in the club they'll take you out like you're a Branch Davidian. If muslims never killed people or hijacked planes nobody would give a crap about them. To be fair, if the christians never had the crusades nobody would give a crap about them either.
I agree. I've heard it said that a cult becomes a religion when it begins to kill people outside its own membership.
If you're just a psycho with a few people in the club they'll take you out like you're a Branch Davidian. If muslims never killed people or hijacked planes nobody would give a crap about them. To be fair, if the christians never had the crusades nobody would give a crap about them either./quote? I've heard it said that a cult becomes a religion when it begin to kill people outside its own membership.
If I create software that (somehow) gets a person killed, through an error of my own doing and not the user's, am I not responsible for it ? Pretend EULA's don't apply, just for the sake of argument.
Actually, no, you probably would not be. Put it like this: if engineers were to be held accountable for every mistake, nobody would be an engineer. Sure, if there were malicious intent on your part, you'd be in trouble, but if an engineer does make a mistake (we all do, nobody's perfect) and that mistake makes it out into the field, it's the organization, it's policies, and it's leadership that failed, and should be held responsible. The same thing applies to BP ... their technical people did their jobs, but management failed bigtime.
If a group of executives create a corporation, whose actions cause great harm and financial distress to millions of people (forget the wildlife for now), don't you think the people behind the corporation should be held responsible?
Sure, and contrary to popular belief the defense afforded by the corporate veil is not absolute. In cases like this, it can and will be penetrated and there will be some jail time involved. The people at the top, unfortunately, can afford the best lawyers and usually find some technical people or middle management to take the fall for them. Sometimes they don't though ... witness Enron.
Unfortunately you can't jail corporations, which are the only guilty part in this (no, a corporation and the people who run it are not the same thing). Ah, the joys of incorporating.
Depends. What our government can do is disband them, at least the parts and assets which are under our control, and sell off the assets. Furthermore, the corporate veil most certainly can be penetrated when the criminal acts are of sufficient magnitude. RICO if nothing else (BP certainly qualifies as a corrupt organization, so far as I'm concerned, and at $3.08/gallon for gasoline, they're racketeers.) The question is more one of whether there is sufficient political will to pull it off. Given our corporatist Congress, and our corporatist Supreme Court, I'm not holding my breath.
I can't believe that industries are allowed to do things like drill for oil underwater (which is complex and when failure can cost billions USD and human lives) without having set, tested plans in place in case of this sort of catastrophe.
They do! Hordes of lobbyists descending upon Washington the instant the accident hits the five o'clock news.
You ask yourself 'whatcouldpossiblygowrong' and you try to answer the question. You keep the suits well away from engineering decisions.
Yeah, like NASA during the Apollo era.
sorry but i've played this game before. the operators of that drill rig know damn well the heat is on them, and in classic form that are looking to blame management of BP because they know chumps like you will buy into it.
Who is more the fool ... the fool, or the fool who hires him?
What a jerk. Am I supposed to argue with you?
Nope. I like to spew forth and let people bask in the glow of my overarching wisdom. Or something like that.
My thoughts were exactly that when I read this. But this is published in Nature photonics, it cannot be all fake. There is a possibility of incorrect experiments/conclusion, but it cannot be complete BS.
Sure it can. 99% of scientific experiments prove to be complete BS (which is, in and of itself, valuable ... at least you know the approaches that don't work.) Whether this is pure fabrication, bad science, or just a failed experiment has yet to be determined.
I still don't get it. Could you use a car analogy?
Certainly. See, a Model-T entangles with a 1963 Corvette. The owner of the Corvette calls the cops on his cell phone over air. The Model-T's owner uses a landline.
Apparently there are liars and thieves everywhere but the thing in China especially is a lack of respect for intellectual property. Many just don't see it as severe as stealing physical property. But it will get better just like the Americans did. There was a time when Charles Dickens angrily accused Americans of stealing, and of course Americans' big brains don't remember that nowadays.
Huh? We're not talking about intellectual property here, you goofball, we're talking about intellectual honesty. Whether or not American publishers ripped off Charles Dickens is irrelevant in this context. Matter of fact, the public-at-large benefited by that violation of copyright law: it was only Dickens and his publisher that lost out. Conversely, when scientists are dishonest and lack the requisite ethics to perform good science, we all lose. Not that I'm picking solely on them: our efforts suffer from politics as well, however we seem to get more spectacular examples of scientific fraud out of China. Their cultural imperatives seem to be a disadvantage here.
... on the other hand, this may just be a way to sabotage our researchers by making them waste their time trying to reproduce the un-reproducible.
For their sakes I hope I'm wrong because they'll find themselves heading down the garden path if they don't do something about it
That philosophy of his sounds exactly like bullying to me.
"Sometimes we only find the right balance by taking what we can get, and then backing off when a victim fights back".
Rapidly losing respect for this man. Shame - the books are (for the most part) great.
Some things may be good for society as a whole, yet very, very bad for certain members of that society. It's important to make that distinction, and I think he failed to do that. In an overall cultural context, yes, it's important to try new things and see if they work ... but we already know the damage that can be caused to individuals by loss of privacy. There's no goddamn experiment to required to figure out that people can be hurt when organizations who collect private information fail to protect it. Period.
And for all you "information wants to be free" idiots out there, realize that when confidential information is released, usually somebody gets hurt. Now, we may find that acceptable if it's information about a corporation or government organization that is committing illegal acts, but this isn't the same thing. These are individuals who (foolishly, as it turns out) trusted a corporation to keep their secrets: there's no overriding social concern that can be used to justify the release of information that can cause someone to get ripped off, suffer identity theft, or worse. There just isn't.
Democracy has often been described as a "great experiment". Throughout history it has never been tried on as broad a scale as this one.
It still hasn't been tried, and there's a reason for that. In spite of much Presidential rhetoric about "this great Democracy of ours", and general ignorance of the subject by many people, the U.S. is not now, and has never been, a democracy. That's because our Founders were some pretty smart cookies who understood very clearly that true democracy cannot be trusted to work on any significant scale. And why is that? Because they also knew that We the People could not be trusted to cast our votes in a way that was good for all of us, and that democracy often tends to devolve into mob rule. Even so, much of their planning revolved around how to give voters the tools to grasp the bigger picture: our educational system for one, freedom of the press for another. All that was intended to produce educated, well-informed voters who would cast their votes wisely. That worked reasonably well for a long time, but the cracks are showing
... but when you know up front that what you're doing is going to damage some number of your own customers, you really should take a step back. Facebook can't get out of this by claiming they didn't know what they were doing, that it was just an experiment. They've demonstrated that they don't give a damn about their users, and that means those users should also take a step back, decide if what Facebook has to offer is really worth it. That's good advice regarding online services in general, when you get right down to it.
Unfortunately for any form of self-government, people usually vote what they think is best for themselves, and the design of our representative republic tried to take that into account. The fundamental problem with such a system is that (sooner or later) those duly-elected representatives start voting only what is best for them, and warp the political system to the point where our influence over their decision-making is minimized. That's the state of affairs in our great "democracy" today. Who will watch the watchers indeed, and when you consider the amount of damage almost three hundred million of us have suffered at the hands of those 434 people in D.C., well, it's tragic, really, it is. But it was we who let them corrupt our educational system, it was we who have accepted an unprecedented (for us) level of media control.
So far as Facebook et. al. go, it's one thing to try something new, to experiment, push the envelope
Doesn't that mean that car has to be Bluetooth? I'm confused.
Nope. You'll need a bluetooth-capable OBD adapter. I linked to the one I bought in my reply to Mr. 3ntropy above.
That wasn't flamebait, fanboi-mods, that was my opinion of Steve Jobs and I'm entitled to it.
"I think Apple licensed it from Xerox. But yeah, I share your opinion of Jobs"
No, they just stole the gui before MS did.
Not exactly.
It was basically made illegal because the content industry told our politicians that we'd be transformed into a Internet equivalent of a third world country otherwise.
Well, like most countries that are going down that road (like mine, the U.S.) what's actually going to happen is that we'll all become cultural backwaters. Anything that was good will be locked away, and anyone that tries to create anything new will be sued into oblivion.
The tragedy of all this is the number of perhaps well-meaning lawmakers who buy into content industry lies. There are also those who know exactly what is going on, know the damage they're causing, but do it anyway because they get paid for it. The entire industry is sick and really needs to be reined in on an international level, before they cause any more grief.
This is the one I ordered (at least, the picture looks identical): ELM 327 Interface.
I've been very happy with it, it's handled every protocol I've tried it with, and it's never failed to pair or connect.