Every once in a while, a court rules in a way that seems like an attack on privacy, but in fact is just reiterating current standards of (non) privacy in certain weird conditions, because some plaintiff or defendant is trying to wildly re-construe privacy to include some bizarre condition they got caught up in.
If you butt-dial someone, the call is not private to the exclusion of the recipient the same way that if you accidentally email a sensitive document to the wrong person and then try to sue them for possessing the sensitive information.
Sometimes a court opinion makes sense. I had a boss who said "Don't act surprised when it works*," but that's hard to do with the modern legal system.
*He meant this in the context of customer demonstrations of our software, but the principle is broader than that.
I dunno what your criticism is. It's factually accurate, which is (by Slashdot standards) pretty remarkable. In fact, the "bored housewife" angle is actually the primary difference between this story and lots of other "start computer company up in (garage|basement|warehouse) in the late '70s, get stomped flat by IBM in the early '80s" stories.
"Absolve Verizon of customer service responsibilities"?
Why would Verizon take that deal? As far as they're concerned, they already aren't particularly responsible for customer service. But they can rake in the fees from their captive customer base.
What NY seems to be asking Verizon is "Pretty please, lay in the last mile of fiber and then step away."
You'll have to seriously sweeten the pot (such as extortionate wholesale service fees) to make it more profitable for Verizon to do this, vice continuing to squeeze its current copper-service victims for sunk-cost mostly-profit revenues. And for companies like Verizon, "less profit" is a non-starter.
He can't sell that exploit. He's already given it away. Here.
Please tell me about the other amazing business strategies you're contemplating. Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
Brute forcing your own account isn't banned. But it's not rewarded, either. That's what the "If you believe you have found a method to conduct a brute-force or code injection attack, please report it to us without testing it." bit of the rules means.
In other words, no, Bennett, you did not outsmart those meanies in charge of making the rules of this bug bounty system. Your hack wasn't particularly clever, so doesn't get rewarded as if it were. However, the bug report itself is probably valid, and United obviously has some fixing to do. (No failed-PIN limiter? The 1970s called; they'd like their input validation methodology back.)
I'm going to market a homeopathic router. Radiated power measured in femtowatts, properly diluted with open air and succussed* correctly, will have an effective wifi range measured in light-years. I figure a good 30C dilution will work fine.
(BTW, if the user doesn't get the proper range from the device in use, it'll be because they didn't hit the router correctly.)
In Windows, use the Java Control Panel and select the "Advanced" tab.
At the very bottom of the list, completely out-of-sight unless you scroll aaaaaaal the way down, in a category called "Beware of the Leopard"... no, sorry, I meant "Miscellaneous"... there's a checkbox labeled "Suppress sponsor offers when installing or updating Java".
Of course, by default it's not checked. Because money.
But check it and apply or "OK" the settings change. In the current implementation, this prevents bundling the Ask.com malware with Java upgrades -- it's a pre-opt-out, and you never have to think of it again. (At least, until Oracle decides the option should auto-magically unset itself when the user's not looking. Because money.)
Assuming this option continues to exist in future Oracle Java versions and is honored for the Yahoo tie-in, this would alleviate the pre-opt-in crapware issue. Big assumptions, of course, because Oracle.
(Or alternately, don't install Java if you don't actually need it. Or install OpenJava rather than Oracle's.)
I think Putin is capable of being photographed climbing onto a T-72 flying the Russian flag, surrounded by Russian soldiers while standing in front of the sign that says "Welcome to Donetsk, Ukraine! Population 944,000" while explaining to a NY Times correspondent that no Russian troops are in Ukraine.
And do it all with a straight face.
You ever noticed you never see Vladimir Putin and the Iraqi Minister of Information together at the same time? Hmmm....
It'll take "canaries" inside of the system though to draw attention to it.
Next up: NDAs integrated into contracts that prevent disclosure of this kind of termination/outsourcing, on penalty of immediate termination for cause and no severance.
The next time Disney does this, it'll take more than a canary: it'll take a whistle-blower willing to eat the personal consequences. Because in Disney management's mind, they "would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for those meddling kids!"*
I'm a veteran too. I'm coming to the conclusion that OPSEC is dead, because social media guarantees the loosest lips in history.
The only way to "fix" this is either submitting social media participation of military personnel to military censorship, or a strongly enforced ban on military member participation in social media.
ad nauseam: the "*" regex operator means "zero or more occurrences of the previous pattern", which in this case is the character "8".
At least, I hope they're not supposed to be regexes. Otherwise, the kernel blacklist itself will have some serious issues known-bad SSDs because someone never learned how to create a regular expression.
But Motorola did it. (Ducks.) (Ducks 65 more times.)
But the history of Iridium tells a tale that Google appears to have listened to.
It's 66 satellites, not 77 (the actual atomic number of Iridium, the purported reason for the name) because 66 satellites are cheaper to launch and maintain than 77. And still, the company went bankrupt because they couldn't get customers willing to subscribe to the service. And the successor company depends on the US DoD as a major customer -- 23% of their 2012 revenue. That's quite a lifeline -- not one I envision Google's corporate culture rushing out to embrace.
The technical challenges aren't hard, notwithstanding the validity of the "it's rocket science" jokes. The financial and market challenges are the real ones. It's not the same as sticking a website out there and labeling it "Google Foobar (beta)". It makes money from Day One or it gets the hose again.
This is the crux of the current brouhaha. The Prenda weasels are blowing off settlements, claiming extreme poverty while desperately shoving huge amounts of money into wholly-owned shell companies and hidden bank accounts.
I want to ask "why are these walking cancer tumors still breathing?", but that's a little extreme. Just a little.
Why are they walking around free? In a just world, they'd be cooling their heels behind bars.
We slashdotters complain vociferously about the (lack of) quality of the editors here at Slashdot. But it could always be worse. We could have editors like the ones at that other Dice holding, who steal people's contributions and put their own labels on them, and then wrap them in malware.
It'd be like Timothy personally claiming every +1-or-higher comment made in one of the articles he "edited", leaving only Goatse and GNAA trollage for us plebians.
Slashdot Mirror
Every once in a while, a court rules in a way that seems like an attack on privacy, but in fact is just reiterating current standards of (non) privacy in certain weird conditions, because some plaintiff or defendant is trying to wildly re-construe privacy to include some bizarre condition they got caught up in.
If you butt-dial someone, the call is not private to the exclusion of the recipient the same way that if you accidentally email a sensitive document to the wrong person and then try to sue them for possessing the sensitive information.
Sometimes a court opinion makes sense. I had a boss who said "Don't act surprised when it works*," but that's hard to do with the modern legal system.
*He meant this in the context of customer demonstrations of our software, but the principle is broader than that.
Well, except for crushing the desire to actually, really teach from those teachers that foolishly try to do that.
Because if you can't win, only a fool keeps trying.
Which is how young idealistic teachers become old embittered ones.
I dunno what your criticism is. It's factually accurate, which is (by Slashdot standards) pretty remarkable. In fact, the "bored housewife" angle is actually the primary difference between this story and lots of other "start computer company up in (garage|basement|warehouse) in the late '70s, get stomped flat by IBM in the early '80s" stories.
Is this a SJW thing?
Sounds like the invisible hand of the free market in action.
I think Adam Smith would have looked at Rockefeller and said "Dick move, man... serious dick move."
Fallout 4 needs wooly deathclaws.
Just sayin'.
<protest>Black horns matter!</protest>
Wait, when did the discussion switch over to Slashdot?
"Absolve Verizon of customer service responsibilities"?
Why would Verizon take that deal? As far as they're concerned, they already aren't particularly responsible for customer service. But they can rake in the fees from their captive customer base.
What NY seems to be asking Verizon is "Pretty please, lay in the last mile of fiber and then step away."
You'll have to seriously sweeten the pot (such as extortionate wholesale service fees) to make it more profitable for Verizon to do this, vice continuing to squeeze its current copper-service victims for sunk-cost mostly-profit revenues. And for companies like Verizon, "less profit" is a non-starter.
"Jet" means any stream of high-velocity low-pressure fluid... like rocket exhaust, or water, or air, accelerated in a ducted fan.
It's a jet device.
He can't sell that exploit. He's already given it away. Here.
Please tell me about the other amazing business strategies you're contemplating. Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
Brute forcing your own account isn't banned. But it's not rewarded, either. That's what the "If you believe you have found a method to conduct a brute-force or code injection attack, please report it to us without testing it." bit of the rules means.
In other words, no, Bennett, you did not outsmart those meanies in charge of making the rules of this bug bounty system. Your hack wasn't particularly clever, so doesn't get rewarded as if it were. However, the bug report itself is probably valid, and United obviously has some fixing to do. (No failed-PIN limiter? The 1970s called; they'd like their input validation methodology back.)
for support reasons
You're not asking the correct question.
"To support whom?"
I'm going to go one step beyond.
I'm going to market a homeopathic router. Radiated power measured in femtowatts, properly diluted with open air and succussed* correctly, will have an effective wifi range measured in light-years. I figure a good 30C dilution will work fine.
(BTW, if the user doesn't get the proper range from the device in use, it'll be because they didn't hit the router correctly.)
Problem, wifi router market?
In Windows, use the Java Control Panel and select the "Advanced" tab.
At the very bottom of the list, completely out-of-sight unless you scroll aaaaaaal the way down, in a category called "Beware of the Leopard"... no, sorry, I meant "Miscellaneous"... there's a checkbox labeled "Suppress sponsor offers when installing or updating Java".
Of course, by default it's not checked. Because money.
But check it and apply or "OK" the settings change. In the current implementation, this prevents bundling the Ask.com malware with Java upgrades -- it's a pre-opt-out, and you never have to think of it again. (At least, until Oracle decides the option should auto-magically unset itself when the user's not looking. Because money.)
Assuming this option continues to exist in future Oracle Java versions and is honored for the Yahoo tie-in, this would alleviate the pre-opt-in crapware issue. Big assumptions, of course, because Oracle.
(Or alternately, don't install Java if you don't actually need it. Or install OpenJava rather than Oracle's.)
This is not malicious. It is stupid and ignorant, but not malicious.
--Clark's corollary to Hanlon's Razor after Clarke's 3rd Law
What Voltaire taught long ago:
Il est dangereux d'avoir raison dans des choses où des hommes accrédités ont tort.
("It is dangerous to be right when established men are wrong.")
I think Putin is capable of being photographed climbing onto a T-72 flying the Russian flag, surrounded by Russian soldiers while standing in front of the sign that says "Welcome to Donetsk, Ukraine! Population 944,000" while explaining to a NY Times correspondent that no Russian troops are in Ukraine.
And do it all with a straight face.
You ever noticed you never see Vladimir Putin and the Iraqi Minister of Information together at the same time? Hmmm....
You don't happen to work for the Public Affairs office at Patrick AFB, do you?
It'll take "canaries" inside of the system though to draw attention to it.
Next up: NDAs integrated into contracts that prevent disclosure of this kind of termination/outsourcing, on penalty of immediate termination for cause and no severance.
The next time Disney does this, it'll take more than a canary: it'll take a whistle-blower willing to eat the personal consequences. Because in Disney management's mind, they "would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for those meddling kids!"*
*yeah, I know, that's Hanna-Barbera, not Disney.
I'm a veteran too. I'm coming to the conclusion that OPSEC is dead, because social media guarantees the loosest lips in history.
The only way to "fix" this is either submitting social media participation of military personnel to military censorship, or a strongly enforced ban on military member participation in social media.
Which, I suspect, wouldn't work.
ObPedant: those aren't regexes, they're globs. Otherwise (for instance), the Samsung entry would match
Samsung SSD<space>
Samsung SSD<space>8
Samsung SSD<space>88
Samsung SSD<space>888
.
.
.
ad nauseam: the "*" regex operator means "zero or more occurrences of the previous pattern", which in this case is the character "8".
At least, I hope they're not supposed to be regexes. Otherwise, the kernel blacklist itself will have some serious issues known-bad SSDs because someone never learned how to create a regular expression.
Correct title: "TRIM and Any Fucking Operating System: Don't Buy Defective SSDs"
It's not as if Windows or MacOS has any magic that makes queued TRIM work with non-compliant and poorly-coded hardware, right?
Seriously, WTF, over?
But Motorola did it. (Ducks.) (Ducks 65 more times.)
But the history of Iridium tells a tale that Google appears to have listened to.
It's 66 satellites, not 77 (the actual atomic number of Iridium, the purported reason for the name) because 66 satellites are cheaper to launch and maintain than 77. And still, the company went bankrupt because they couldn't get customers willing to subscribe to the service. And the successor company depends on the US DoD as a major customer -- 23% of their 2012 revenue. That's quite a lifeline -- not one I envision Google's corporate culture rushing out to embrace.
The technical challenges aren't hard, notwithstanding the validity of the "it's rocket science" jokes. The financial and market challenges are the real ones. It's not the same as sticking a website out there and labeling it "Google Foobar (beta)". It makes money from Day One or it gets the hose again.
Not paying the settlements levied against them.
This is the crux of the current brouhaha. The Prenda weasels are blowing off settlements, claiming extreme poverty while desperately shoving huge amounts of money into wholly-owned shell companies and hidden bank accounts.
I want to ask "why are these walking cancer tumors still breathing?", but that's a little extreme. Just a little.
Why are they walking around free? In a just world, they'd be cooling their heels behind bars.
We slashdotters complain vociferously about the (lack of) quality of the editors here at Slashdot. But it could always be worse. We could have editors like the ones at that other Dice holding, who steal people's contributions and put their own labels on them, and then wrap them in malware.
It'd be like Timothy personally claiming every +1-or-higher comment made in one of the articles he "edited", leaving only Goatse and GNAA trollage for us plebians.