Might not be an option for you, but if you speak any other language, just change the Windows/Mac/Linux system language to it.
I can't count the number of people who've asked to use my laptop, been challenged by "Cet ordinateur est utilisé et a été verrouillé... Appuyez sur Ctrl-Alt-Suppr pour déverrouiller cet ordinateur" (or even just noticed that the Start Menu is labeled "Démarrer") and have gone "Oh, well... I'll ask John over there then, I guess."
Also, even if people know that English is your native language, you can claim that you're trying to learn and that you've changed your computer over to get some practise with it. No need to have people think that you're intentionally trying to prevent them from using your system.
I dunno about that. Right now, the reason we have to rely on sketch ideas like "He's attracted to children, so he must be guilty of child porn" (we shouldn't be, but that's another story) is simply because there's no better way to do it.
If, with technology like that, we could ask "Did you download and possess child pornography" and know we were getting a truthful answer, wouldn't that help innocent people more than the current reliance on character testimony does?
Legally, the foundation is a registered nonprofit, which allows them (through the arcane tax code of the United States) some benefit in dealing with donations. Tax receipts, I believe?
However, the difference with the 4th amendment rights is people are stupid enough to GIVE them up, which is what is happening. Someone can say "I want to search you" but you can reply "I am not giving up my 4th amendment rights/where is your warrant" and if they do any form of searching/even touch you for any reason other than arrest, they just violated your rights.
Fine, feel free to say that. And yes, they cannot search you if you refuse. But they are quite within their rights to say "Right, you're not going anywhere near our airplane" if you do refuse.
Remember that only a portion of XBoxes sold will ever show up on XB Live - I own an XBox 360, and I've never once connected it to the net. Hence, Microsoft has to make a guess at what portion of sold XBoxes will wind up on the net, and apparently guessed wrong. (I.e. The net supports 100,000, and we sell 200,000 but only about 1 in 2 ever gets onto the net, so we're good) Still really dumb, but a far cry from the picture of them malevolently planning network outages that you paint.
No, you couldn't. In the US, at least, Attorney-Client Privilege comes in only when:
The communication relates to a fact of which the attorney was informed:
1. by his client,
2. without the presence of strangers,
3. for the purpose of securing primarily either:
1. an opinion on law, or
2. legal services, or
3. assistance in some legal proceeding,
So it only matter when you're requesting their services for an opinion on law, legal services, or help in a legal proceeding. It'd be a bit of a stretch to claim any of those three if you had them install a DVD burner for you - hence, AC Privilege wouldn't apply.
Click on the checkmark, mate. It shows what their actual stance is - the checkmark only means that they were able to find info on the candidate's stance
The government may use "lots of other people are doing it" as justification for NON-illegal acts it does. Editing Wikipedia? Not illegal. Speeding/Creative tax deductions? Illegal.
Hence, the Nuremberg argument doesn't apply here either. If the guard had been "just doing his job" when he brutally murdered someone, that wouldn't be a defense. But all this guard did was edit Wikipedia - nothing illegal about that, hence, defense works.
I agree with you that doctors are held to an unrealistic standard, but it's going overboard to claim that doctors shouldn't be held to a way higher standard than, say, lawyers. You screw up a legal brief, you amend it. You screw up a medical operation, someone dies (or suffers serious health consequences, or has to be physically cut open to repair it, etc.).
It only makes sense to hold the profession where there's the most harm in a mistake to the highest level of perfection.
Depends on how you challenge it. If you challenge it on prior art, and you had the prior art, you can flip it and make it yours. On the other hand, if you argue it's unpatentable, then I see your point about everybody being able to take advantage of your (expensive) legal efforts.
except for the fact that a local botnet will be able to DDoS more effectively than a distant one
Not advocating for a national firewall, but that'd actually be great, if we could make it harder to DDoS from outside the country. Someone DDoSing from inside the country is subject to our laws and can be arrested and punished, as opposed to someone from Brazil doing so.
In this circumstance, the anonymous blogger has nothing to complain about. Despite the litany of "Do not evil, yeah right!" posts that are already becoming evident in this discussion, I think google did the least evil thing possible. An anonymous blogger was committing slander, which is a civil tort. Under the rules of any civilized legal system, the plaintiff has the right to go after someone who has unjustly slandered their name - this is especially true for politicians, whose very livelihood relies on their reputation. If this person lied to defame someone, they should certainly have the weight of the law come down upon them. Furthermore, all google did was give out the information on how to contact the blogger. This blogger will not be served with the lawsuit, and will have the opportunity to defend themselves. And all this after giving to blogger a, I would think, unnecessarily generous offer to contest the ruling anonymously. In short, I think that everything Google did throughout this process has been quite in keeping with their motto, and see this as a perfectly reasonable series of steps to take in accordance with their ethics and the law.
The problem with this is that it's vulnerable to exactly what they did: faking an email. The penetration testers, a few days before their visit, sent an email forged to look like it was from senior management informing people about this. Now, it looks like the senior manager initiated the visit, though he has no clue. It's a bad idea to rely on the idea that "whoever initiated the visit should be responsible for watching them" - what happens if the security guard just sent them on their way, while assuming that the blissfully ignorant senior executive will have someone watching them?
You need a consistent policy to apply to all visitors; one which doesn't rely on assuming someone else will take care of the problem.
Not so much $50,000 worth of servers, as gadzillions worth of potential data. Think of how many credit card numbers/SSNs fit on $50,000 of servers... Depending on who they host (if they host any e-retailers or such) what was on the hard drives could be worth far more than the servers.
The place is 10000 sq. ft. Not at all unreasonable that they could have cut through away from where the Night Manager was stationed... Especially if the Night Manager was making his rounds of the upper floors or something, while they cut in on the ground.
While people will have a field day making fun of C I Host for this, I'd say it really wasn't the company's fault. Frankly, it's a corporate datacentre, not an armed installation. Their service extends to protecting your data against router problems, power outages, hacking attempts... Not armed incursion. That's not a web-host's job.
Though I'd agree it's definitely a poor representation of C I Host that they kept their customers in the dark about the attack. The frequency is odd, too... Do they have any particularly important customers who are being particularly targeted, or is the incidence of burglaries just bad luck?
My Gamecube will happily play any game I stick into it
What? Not only will the game cube not play any game purchased outside your "region", Nintendo was the first video game manufacturer to include such technology. Games purchased in one of the four regions (Asia, North America, Europe and Oceania, China) can't be used outside that region. Of course, you know this in advance (or should, at least) and they can't remotely kill your game, so it's better than Steam, but not by much...
Good point. Even in areas of great reception, Cell-based location techniques are generally off by a few hundred meters - easily enough for people in homes and pedestrians to make it seem like an enormous traffic jam. Assisted GPS (using a GPS to find the cell phone, rather than just a cell-based approach) would probably be able to tell if they're on the road or off, but in areas of high building A-GPS has a tendency to not work. So, it would work great in areas of less development, but downtown (where traffic data is more needed) it would suck. Also, A-GPS is mandated in the US (for 911 service) but I don't know what the percentage of cell phones in Bangalore would have inbuilt GPSs...
If all you're interested in is all credit pointing back to you, just go to your local copyright office, register the copyright on it, and offer it under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which allows anyone to use, share or create derivative works of. Alternatively, if you don't want anyone messing with it, use the Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivatives License.
This way, people are free to use it under the terms those licenses provide for, but since you hold the registered copyright, if anyone tries to use it for anything the licenses don't allow, you can take them to court. Thanks to the copyright registration, the burden of proof is shifted to them to prove that you *don't* own it, not an easy task compared to you having to prove you do own it.
If the idea is more of an invention, than you'd be better off patenting it, which is much more expensive ($500 for patent, $40 for copyright), but the same idea applies: Register protection on it, then license it so that anyone can use it under your terms.
That's fine too. It's a win-win situation for them - the users that don't know how to safeguard their online identity (proxies, etc.) are protected, while those who can anonymize themselves can access their website.
We need something that will make folks excited, like "Naked Bimbos Everywhere".
The best way to encourage uptake in 802.11b at your workplace would be posters: a. Noting 802.11b on site b. Advising of troubleshooting techniques c. Advertising best coverage areas d. Advertising 'Kournokova nude - only on wireless!' -- BOFH
Slashdot Mirror
Might not be an option for you, but if you speak any other language, just change the Windows/Mac/Linux system language to it.
I can't count the number of people who've asked to use my laptop, been challenged by "Cet ordinateur est utilisé et a été verrouillé ... Appuyez sur Ctrl-Alt-Suppr pour déverrouiller cet ordinateur" (or even just noticed that the Start Menu is labeled "Démarrer") and have gone "Oh, well... I'll ask John over there then, I guess."
Also, even if people know that English is your native language, you can claim that you're trying to learn and that you've changed your computer over to get some practise with it. No need to have people think that you're intentionally trying to prevent them from using your system.
Quebec is actually masculine, as is Canada (le Quebec, le Canada).
Notice that the motto of the Bloc Quebecois (the political party that advocates specifically for Quebec) is "Present pour le Quebec"
I dunno about that. Right now, the reason we have to rely on sketch ideas like "He's attracted to children, so he must be guilty of child porn" (we shouldn't be, but that's another story) is simply because there's no better way to do it.
If, with technology like that, we could ask "Did you download and possess child pornography" and know we were getting a truthful answer, wouldn't that help innocent people more than the current reliance on character testimony does?
Legally, the foundation is a registered nonprofit, which allows them (through the arcane tax code of the United States) some benefit in dealing with donations. Tax receipts, I believe?
Fine, feel free to say that. And yes, they cannot search you if you refuse. But they are quite within their rights to say "Right, you're not going anywhere near our airplane" if you do refuse.
Remember that only a portion of XBoxes sold will ever show up on XB Live - I own an XBox 360, and I've never once connected it to the net. Hence, Microsoft has to make a guess at what portion of sold XBoxes will wind up on the net, and apparently guessed wrong. (I.e. The net supports 100,000, and we sell 200,000 but only about 1 in 2 ever gets onto the net, so we're good) Still really dumb, but a far cry from the picture of them malevolently planning network outages that you paint.
So it only matter when you're requesting their services for an opinion on law, legal services, or help in a legal proceeding. It'd be a bit of a stretch to claim any of those three if you had them install a DVD burner for you - hence, AC Privilege wouldn't apply.
Click on the checkmark, mate. It shows what their actual stance is - the checkmark only means that they were able to find info on the candidate's stance
The government may use "lots of other people are doing it" as justification for NON-illegal acts it does. Editing Wikipedia? Not illegal. Speeding/Creative tax deductions? Illegal.
Hence, the Nuremberg argument doesn't apply here either. If the guard had been "just doing his job" when he brutally murdered someone, that wouldn't be a defense. But all this guard did was edit Wikipedia - nothing illegal about that, hence, defense works.
I agree with you that doctors are held to an unrealistic standard, but it's going overboard to claim that doctors shouldn't be held to a way higher standard than, say, lawyers. You screw up a legal brief, you amend it. You screw up a medical operation, someone dies (or suffers serious health consequences, or has to be physically cut open to repair it, etc.).
It only makes sense to hold the profession where there's the most harm in a mistake to the highest level of perfection.
Depends on how you challenge it. If you challenge it on prior art, and you had the prior art, you can flip it and make it yours. On the other hand, if you argue it's unpatentable, then I see your point about everybody being able to take advantage of your (expensive) legal efforts.
Not advocating for a national firewall, but that'd actually be great, if we could make it harder to DDoS from outside the country. Someone DDoSing from inside the country is subject to our laws and can be arrested and punished, as opposed to someone from Brazil doing so.
In this circumstance, the anonymous blogger has nothing to complain about. Despite the litany of "Do not evil, yeah right!" posts that are already becoming evident in this discussion, I think google did the least evil thing possible. An anonymous blogger was committing slander, which is a civil tort. Under the rules of any civilized legal system, the plaintiff has the right to go after someone who has unjustly slandered their name - this is especially true for politicians, whose very livelihood relies on their reputation. If this person lied to defame someone, they should certainly have the weight of the law come down upon them. Furthermore, all google did was give out the information on how to contact the blogger. This blogger will not be served with the lawsuit, and will have the opportunity to defend themselves. And all this after giving to blogger a, I would think, unnecessarily generous offer to contest the ruling anonymously. In short, I think that everything Google did throughout this process has been quite in keeping with their motto, and see this as a perfectly reasonable series of steps to take in accordance with their ethics and the law.
The problem with this is that it's vulnerable to exactly what they did: faking an email. The penetration testers, a few days before their visit, sent an email forged to look like it was from senior management informing people about this. Now, it looks like the senior manager initiated the visit, though he has no clue. It's a bad idea to rely on the idea that "whoever initiated the visit should be responsible for watching them" - what happens if the security guard just sent them on their way, while assuming that the blissfully ignorant senior executive will have someone watching them?
You need a consistent policy to apply to all visitors; one which doesn't rely on assuming someone else will take care of the problem.
Not so much $50,000 worth of servers, as gadzillions worth of potential data. Think of how many credit card numbers/SSNs fit on $50,000 of servers... Depending on who they host (if they host any e-retailers or such) what was on the hard drives could be worth far more than the servers.
The place is 10000 sq. ft. Not at all unreasonable that they could have cut through away from where the Night Manager was stationed... Especially if the Night Manager was making his rounds of the upper floors or something, while they cut in on the ground.
While people will have a field day making fun of C I Host for this, I'd say it really wasn't the company's fault. Frankly, it's a corporate datacentre, not an armed installation. Their service extends to protecting your data against router problems, power outages, hacking attempts... Not armed incursion. That's not a web-host's job.
Though I'd agree it's definitely a poor representation of C I Host that they kept their customers in the dark about the attack. The frequency is odd, too... Do they have any particularly important customers who are being particularly targeted, or is the incidence of burglaries just bad luck?
What? Not only will the game cube not play any game purchased outside your "region", Nintendo was the first video game manufacturer to include such technology. Games purchased in one of the four regions (Asia, North America, Europe and Oceania, China) can't be used outside that region. Of course, you know this in advance (or should, at least) and they can't remotely kill your game, so it's better than Steam, but not by much...
You probably did opt in to his. Read the fine print in your phone contract...
Good point. Even in areas of great reception, Cell-based location techniques are generally off by a few hundred meters - easily enough for people in homes and pedestrians to make it seem like an enormous traffic jam. Assisted GPS (using a GPS to find the cell phone, rather than just a cell-based approach) would probably be able to tell if they're on the road or off, but in areas of high building A-GPS has a tendency to not work. So, it would work great in areas of less development, but downtown (where traffic data is more needed) it would suck. Also, A-GPS is mandated in the US (for 911 service) but I don't know what the percentage of cell phones in Bangalore would have inbuilt GPSs...
If all you're interested in is all credit pointing back to you, just go to your local copyright office, register the copyright on it, and offer it under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which allows anyone to use, share or create derivative works of. Alternatively, if you don't want anyone messing with it, use the Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivatives License.
This way, people are free to use it under the terms those licenses provide for, but since you hold the registered copyright, if anyone tries to use it for anything the licenses don't allow, you can take them to court. Thanks to the copyright registration, the burden of proof is shifted to them to prove that you *don't* own it, not an easy task compared to you having to prove you do own it.
If the idea is more of an invention, than you'd be better off patenting it, which is much more expensive ($500 for patent, $40 for copyright), but the same idea applies: Register protection on it, then license it so that anyone can use it under your terms.
Here in Canada, every candidate from the election is entitled to have a rep. present at the counting, to combat this...
WTF? The parent is rated...Insightful?!?
Anyway, you actually want to bury your computer's network card in the backyard. Poof! Perfect protection against MPAA spying?
That's fine too. It's a win-win situation for them - the users that don't know how to safeguard their online identity (proxies, etc.) are protected, while those who can anonymize themselves can access their website.
The best way to encourage uptake in 802.11b at your workplace would be posters:
a. Noting 802.11b on site
b. Advising of troubleshooting techniques
c. Advertising best coverage areas
d. Advertising 'Kournokova nude - only on wireless!'
-- BOFH