Page 6 under the heading "Potential liability for colleges and universities."
It is worth noting, however, that these
institutions may face claims of contributory or vicarious liability from the conduct of their students.
Not that any student downloading loads of free music would care, but their schools could still be blamed and/or sued for liability. I wouldn't be surprised, given how desparate the music industry is nowadays...
Just as most security schemes could be cracked given enough time and resources, the same could be said of
algorithms for shredding documents (though you could hardly call strip-shredding an "algorithm"). The pressure surely is on for vendors to look harder at reliable and cost-effective ways to systematically and permanently destroy sensitive documents.
Teacher: "Kids, we're going to write an email to the President today! So start gathering your thoughts and questions. And don't foget kids.. You must first determine whether your email will be in support of the White House policy or differing from it!!!"
Jimmy: "I just want to tell Mr. President that he's my role model and I look up to him."
Teacher: "Well, then you support his policies Jimmy!"
Janey: "I wanted to tell Mr. President he's funny looking."
Teacher: "That's pointless. Everyone already knows that. In any case, you disagree with his policies!"
Muffin: "Uh... I dunno if I agree with his policy or not..."
Teacher: "Well, in that case, don't even bother writing him anything."
Why don't you look at the evidence provided by both and consider the relevant context and decide for yourself what you think.
Right. But the problem is, neither Petreley nor Evans Data provided the gory details from this "survey" or its methodology - just a few high-level numbers from the report to backup his claim. He said himself in the article:
It turns out there are so many jewels in the survey results that it's difficult to decide which ones to put on display here at LinuxWorld.
Mind sharing the wealth Nick? In fact, all of it? How do we validate or debunk a claim without the actual backbone from which it stems?
You can't expect to throw a big, unintuitive claim on a hot button issue to a group of intelligent and skeptical technicians, and expect them to go "do their math" on nothing! So naturally from a lack of much to look at or analyze, we start flaming and squabbling, because that's more fun, and plus we're pretty good at it (-;.
I think this may yet be another move to improve his public image and diversify his profile. Look at all the stuff he's done since losing the 2000 race: Publishing books, being a senior advisor to Google and a visiting professor to UCLA, an apparence on Saterday Night Live..
Personally I hope Al Gore will make another run for presidency. Given the way things are looking (wars and tax cuts), 2004 is in the toilet (I think Gore said he wasn't going to run anyway)..
Since we're sort of on the topic, let me ask the Slashdotters this question: wouldn't you rather see Gore running the country than another run-of-the-mill politician who has no appreciation for, and is completely ignorant of, science and technology?
The ethics debate over port scanning are valid, and important. But this technique offers potentials for the world community that definately deserve our attention...
By making this knowledge available to those who live in countries whose government censor internet access, they become empowered to bypass whatever censorship that's imposed on them. The government may block public proxy servers or sites that provide listings to them, but they can't stop someone from discovering proxy servers themselves!
For this very use alone some governments probably make sure port scanning is illegal (if it isn't already). In that case, these governments have better also block all sites that offer port scanning services, which would itself function as a proxy to construct services to find proxy servers.
It's like whack-a-mole, big brothers can try to take out one path to circumvent their restrictions, but sooner or later another one will pop up, and another one, and another one...
I think partly it's the vicariously experience that makes this story interesting.
Mistakes like these are out there - you just have to find it and hope the vendor will go along with it. I have a friend who got a flat panel LCD monitor from Amazon that usually goes for about $700, for $150. Amazon actually honored the transaction!
The differences with this story are probably (1) the price markdown to 2% is way too drastic for a vendor to honor (that would bring the term "bargain hunter" to a whole new level), and (2) if you find a minor blunder to take advantage of, sharing the love with the rest of world probably isn't a good idea. At least not before you get the product! (-;
SCO charges (paragraph 82): "Virtually none of these software developers and hobbyists had access to enterprise-scale equipment and testing facilities for Linux development."
Slashdot Mirror
It is worth noting, however, that these institutions may face claims of contributory or vicarious liability from the conduct of their students.
Not that any student downloading loads of free music would care, but their schools could still be blamed and/or sued for liability. I wouldn't be surprised, given how desparate the music industry is nowadays...
Just as most security schemes could be cracked given enough time and resources, the same could be said of algorithms for shredding documents (though you could hardly call strip-shredding an "algorithm"). The pressure surely is on for vendors to look harder at reliable and cost-effective ways to systematically and permanently destroy sensitive documents.
Jimmy: "I just want to tell Mr. President that he's my role model and I look up to him."
Teacher: "Well, then you support his policies Jimmy!"
Janey: "I wanted to tell Mr. President he's funny looking."
Teacher: "That's pointless. Everyone already knows that. In any case, you disagree with his policies!"
Muffin: "Uh... I dunno if I agree with his policy or not..."
Teacher: "Well, in that case, don't even bother writing him anything."
Right. But the problem is, neither Petreley nor Evans Data provided the gory details from this "survey" or its methodology - just a few high-level numbers from the report to backup his claim. He said himself in the article:
It turns out there are so many jewels in the survey results that it's difficult to decide which ones to put on display here at LinuxWorld.
Mind sharing the wealth Nick? In fact, all of it? How do we validate or debunk a claim without the actual backbone from which it stems?
You can't expect to throw a big, unintuitive claim on a hot button issue to a group of intelligent and skeptical technicians, and expect them to go "do their math" on nothing! So naturally from a lack of much to look at or analyze, we start flaming and squabbling, because that's more fun, and plus we're pretty good at it (-;.
Personally I hope Al Gore will make another run for presidency. Given the way things are looking (wars and tax cuts), 2004 is in the toilet (I think Gore said he wasn't going to run anyway)..
Since we're sort of on the topic, let me ask the Slashdotters this question: wouldn't you rather see Gore running the country than another run-of-the-mill politician who has no appreciation for, and is completely ignorant of, science and technology?
By making this knowledge available to those who live in countries whose government censor internet access, they become empowered to bypass whatever censorship that's imposed on them. The government may block public proxy servers or sites that provide listings to them, but they can't stop someone from discovering proxy servers themselves!
For this very use alone some governments probably make sure port scanning is illegal (if it isn't already). In that case, these governments have better also block all sites that offer port scanning services, which would itself function as a proxy to construct services to find proxy servers.
It's like whack-a-mole, big brothers can try to take out one path to circumvent their restrictions, but sooner or later another one will pop up, and another one, and another one...
Mistakes like these are out there - you just have to find it and hope the vendor will go along with it. I have a friend who got a flat panel LCD monitor from Amazon that usually goes for about $700, for $150. Amazon actually honored the transaction!
The differences with this story are probably (1) the price markdown to 2% is way too drastic for a vendor to honor (that would bring the term "bargain hunter" to a whole new level), and (2) if you find a minor blunder to take advantage of, sharing the love with the rest of world probably isn't a good idea. At least not before you get the product! (-;
Bring in the Vapochill system, NOW!!
Just in case we didn't realize that last time..
What other mischief could the editors of /. be up to today? (-;
Good point from ESR's brief regarding this.
Perhaps these guys should should check their drinking water for hallucinogens.