It's a noun, being used to collectively refer to all Spyware programs.
From Wikipedia: "Common nouns may be capitalized when used as names for the entire class of such things." In this case, Spyware is being used as a name for an entire class of such programs, and is thus capitalized.
It doesn't cost you the entire contents of your bank account if someone figures out your MySpace credentials.
It's simply a matter of going after the most important phishing first... At least, it should be. Neopets, for example, actually gets you to enter your username, then displays a page with some information about your account on it. Only then can you enter your password, after you've confirmed you're talking to the real Neopets homepage. One seriously has to wonder what's up when Neopets has better phishing prevention than your average bank...
Quit being a dumbass. Unless you're also wanting to say that China, Sweden, Germany, Zimbabwe, and Brazil aren't countries either.
America = United States of America China = People's Republic of China Sweden = Kingdom of Sweden Germany = Federal Republic of Germany Zimbabwe = Republic of Zimbabwe Brazil = Federative Republic of Brazil
Do we need to start using every country's official title so your dumb ass can understand us? Get a clue. And just in case you were confused, the common usage of "Americans" refers to citizens of the United States of America, not the entire population of North and South America.
Last I checked, Brazil referred to a country ONLY, and there was no continent named Zimbabwe. However, we have not one but three continents named "America" (North, Central, South)
The poster's point was simply to avoid ambiguity. When there are three continents and a country, all of which go by the same name (not to mention all the Other things named America) it's simply sensible to specify that you're talking about the United States of America. Remember that not all of Slashdot is from the USA, so not everybody is likely to immediately think of Mom, Apple Pie and the Statue of Liberty when they hear "America".
I can do this one better. I signed up for some game known as MapleStory a while back, submitting the password "DaedAEcarECel40s".
I quickly found that I could not log on to my account. I was wondering whether I misspelled my password or something, when I noticed (while reading the FAQ) in small print "Passwords must be 8 characters or less." Now, no warning of this was given anywhere on the sign up form.
In shock, I realized what the issue must have been. Sure enough, trying to log on with password "DaedAEca" worked like a charm.
Yes, not only did they not warn the user that there was a maximum on the password length while signing up, and not only did their form accept my 16-char password, but it actually would not let me log in with the full password. Man, I was pissed and confused for a while...
"A defendant goes into a supermarket and places eight items in a basket which is presented to the cashier for payment in the usual way. Both honestly believe that all eight items have been scanned, and the defendant pays the sum shown on the bill. A store detective, however, notices that a mistake was made by the cashier so that only seven items were actually priced. This detective arrests the defendant after leaving the store. Since the defendant honestly believes that he has become the owner of goods in a sale transaction, he cannot form the mens rea for theft (which is usually dishonesty) when he physically removes them from the store. Accordingly, he should be acquitted."
Same here. If you honestly believed you were downloading legal, adult pornography, and someone slipped a few kiddie pics into there, you would have no mens rea for the crime and would be aquitted (asuming they couldn't prove you had used the pics, or that your belief that you weren't getting kiddie porn wasn't unreasonable. For example, if you downloaded everything from alt.sex.kids, you couldn't claim it was a mistake; since a reasonable person should have expected that they might get child porn from there.)
Umm... This is really an odd statement, here. What do you care that someone can convincingly file any sort of transaction under your name (SSN and Mother's Maiden Name). What do you care that someone could borrow $150,000, and put up your house as security. What do you care that someone could use your info to launder money, with a trail leading right to you when the feds look into it and an onus on you to prove it wasn't you?
Your signature isn't out there, correct. This also means that, when some guy turns up at an out-of-state (for you) bank and takes out a loan, the bank isn't comparing it either. If the guy has the SSN and MMN, he should be able to just scrawl down any signature, and to hell if it's yours. The bank'll believe him, hand him a bunch of cash that you'll later be liable for (or, at best, forced into lengthy and complicated legal proceedings just to have canceled).
In conclusion, I think you should very bloody well care. "Identity Borrowage" is one of the strangest ideas I've ever heard. It's like the argument regarding open wireless networks... "Why not leave my wireless network broadcasting to the world?" You'd probably well change that tune as soon as you were on the hook for someone's downloaded child porn or someone else's racked-up credit card debts in your name.
The problem with this is the bad press MS would get from announcing 11 exploits for every one they discovered. Those "outside the know" would think MS insecurity had gone up by 11x. MS already has major press issues about their many security exploits, they don't need 11 times that.
Also, introducing fake honey pots in the code would cause problems. If they announced it and fixed each one, the honey pots would be useless. If they announced it but didn't fix it, they'd look like they didn't care/or it would make it obvious it was a honey pot. If they didn't announce it or fix it, then invariably some security researcher would find it (it has to be discoverable to become a honey pot) and blast MS for the security vulnerability.
I'm surprised that whomever managed to crack into ASUS's servers only inserted malevolent HTML. Imagine the utter destruction they could have caused if they had *enhanced* the firmware downloads with some sort of (probably boot-sector) virus, or simply modified them to destroy the motherboard... *Shudder*
Why wouldn't they? Are the file images stored separately or otherwise better protected?
Sorry, but when someone's called on you to explain seemingly-illegally-copied code, telling them to "go fuck themselves" is not a bloody option. Try that in the real world sometime, and see how fast an indictment for copyright infringement and the corresponding civil suit comes flying in.
Also, you say he "kill[ed] a truly free implementation of the driver in question," you are totally missing the issue. The entire point of this debate is that the bloody driver wasn't free at all! It was GPL'd code, which gives you the rights to use it within the terms of the GPL. Stripping the legitimate author(s) name(s) from the code and relicensing it under a looser (or, in the case of the GPL, tighter) license is one of the main things the GPL and other licenses are designed to prevent.
I find it regrettable that Michael decided to go so public with this (indeed, as others pointed out, it could probably have been solved privately) but it is absolutely his right, as the "sorry little fuck" who owns the copyright on the code, to protect it as he sees fit. I think the OpenBSD team should be remarkably relieved that Michael diplomatically approached the issue and offered to assist in relicensing the code instead of simply suing Marcus and the other perpetrators of this infringement.
So stop heaping abuse on the guy simply because he chose to protect his legal right to have his original product (the code) used only under the license he selected for it and to not have it used outside those boundaries by anyone else, whether by accident or design. Instead, give him credit for offering to assist in reaching a constructive solution to the issue.
The Brits certainly did show themselves willing to totally ignore civil liberties in dealing with the IRA, such as when the SAS was given total shoot-to-kill authority in dealings in Northern Ireland.
At Ac Lensthey are selling Computer Vision Glasses. Quote: "These glasses have a special tint that helps to reduce glare and the intensity of the light produced by the average computer monitor, and a special UV coating that blocks UV rays produced by monitors and flourescent lighting." Sounds like Just what you're looking for to me.
Also, You might want to look into getting a Glare Screen, there's a good one at FutureShop. Quote Again: "VisionGuard XL, Glare Filter with Radiation Barrier. Relieves eye strain for healthy vision. Reduces glare up to 99%. Fits regular and Flat screen monitors 14 " to 17"." Looks again like it will solve your problem.
AndrewM
You have many options in this situation other then an online backup:
*Buy another HardDrive and occasionally sync the two with Norton Ghost or something similar.
*Buy a Zip Drive and and a few 750mb Zip Disks, and split the file(s) to fit the Disks.
*Do the Same as above, but with a tape drive.
*Maybe set up something with a Friend, you each give each other FTP access to a folder on your server, and you can upload to each other's computers.
If you really want to use an online backup provider, try XDrive. Pretty Good, 500mb for $10.
FreeBSD is free, and , in my personal oppinion, quite as good as Linux with none of the comercialization (No, I am NOT trying to start a flamewar). Most Linux Programms will also run on FreeBSD Including Apache and Oracle as long as you install Linux Binary Emulation.
For a production enviroment, you should use FreeBSD 4.8 ~STABLE, is is very stable.
I think that this game, Tabula Rasa, Is going to be a best seller. Look at it. It's made by a guy with a solid reputation (He brought us Ultima!), and by combining that with today's cutting-edge graphics technologies, It's bound to be good. I don't play any games like this, but I know people who do, and I'd bet they'ed sink thier money into this. Rock on, Richard!
I find it very interesting that this guy accually created this thing. And, I Never knew that phone cables had four minicables. What I want to know is 1:Why did he create this thing as an attachment for LCDproc. Why not standalone? (unless he didn't know how too, In wich case I understand). and 2: Why only for Linux/BSD? Oh yeah. LCDproc only works on Linux and BSD. But why not write a windows version? But why not write a windows version? Anyways, good job to him.
Oh well.If Canada refuses to input biometrics, I guess I'm going to need a visa. But, since Canada is USA Junior, I doubt That Canada will acually refuse. I can just see it now. My passport embedded with my retnia scans, finderprints, a small tape containing a voice sample, programming ability, level of nerdity, and my Slashdot Karma Rating.
Oh ****. How much again does a plane ticket to Ugoslavia cost?
That's a good point. I have no proof that I own this computer that I'm typing on. I have no receipt for it. But I have been using it for a year. So you might think I own it.
--Begin News Story--
This was copied and pasted from the news story that the article linked to. I take no Credit.
The dream of e-government has hit a brick wall because, incredibly, Parliament's Internet domain - www.parliament.uk - doesn't actually exist.
The anomaly has come to light after Parliament's Publications and Archive arm attempted to make way for e-purchases. You are able to view recent Parliament reports online for free but if you wish to purchase a printed version of a report or copies of old legislation, you have to send a cheque to Parliament.
The publications arm applied for an SSL certificate from leading supplier Thwate to provide a route for secure online transactions.
Unfortunately, Thwate has insisted that it be provided with proof that Parliament actually owns parliament.uk. And no one is able to give it. UK domain registrar Nominet runs most.uk domains but not parliament.uk, which was registered before Nominet existed.
Equally, UKERNA - which was the precursor to Nominet and still runs the government and academic domains.gov.uk and.ac.uk - confirmed that it didn't look after parliament.uk. In fact, no one runs parliament.uk and it doesn't officially exist.
The extensive domain, which contains all official information regarding MPs, the House of Commons, House of Lords, UK legislation and just about everything else about the running of the United Kingdom, lives in the shadowlands of the Internet.
The domain itself is one of a very rare breed registered before 1 August 1996, before Nominet existed and when plain.uk addresses were still available. In fact, just 13.uk Internet domains now officially exist, of which only six are still accessible (libraries and nuclear fusion research labs).
Then there are the second-level domain names like.co.uk,.govt.uk. There are 11 of these. Six are run by Nominet, two by UKERNA, nhs.uk by the National Health Service,.police.uk by the police and.mod.uk by the Ministry of Defence.
Parliament.uk exists in no man's land.
Surely this can be easily sorted out though? Well, no. Nominet has no control over the domain and a court case last year actually decided that there was no contract between Nominet and the registrants of domain names registered by the "Naming Committee" - the loose assortment of tech-heads that existed prior to Nominet.
It also has nothing to do with IANA or ICANN - the people behind the global domain names like.com and.org - because the UK domain system is strictly autonomous to it.
The.uk names that do still exist don't pay anything for their domains and have permanent control over them. However, they can't transfer them and no one can buy them. Nominet would like them to register with it but it has no powers to make them and if they do, they would have to pay regular renewal fees.
Nominet is also about as likely to want to charge Parliament for its domain as it is the MoD or itself for its nic.uk domains.
So what can Parliament do about its predicament? It is extremely unlikely that it will want to hand over the running of the domain to anyone else, but then there is no strict way of proving its owns the domain either.
A Nominet spokeswoman told us Nominet is "in contact" with Parliament and will confirm to anyone that asks that Parliament owns parliament.uk but has no plans to do anything about the odd situation.
Parliament will no doubt take months to get back to our queries and presumably just as long to assure Thawte that it is who it says it is. In the meantime, online sales of government publications are on the back burner.
--End News Story--
So... Parliament's website dosen't exist... Interesting. Or just plain weird, depending on how you look at it. I wonder what Parliament is going to do. Register a New domain,maybe? But what about all the people who have the old page bookmarked?
Weird.
Andrew.
Well, this dicussion seems to have found more holes in the internet tax than swiss cheese. I hope someone in the Californian Government reads Slashdot!
Slashdot Mirror
It's a noun, being used to collectively refer to all Spyware programs.
From Wikipedia: "Common nouns may be capitalized when used as names for the entire class of such things." In this case, Spyware is being used as a name for an entire class of such programs, and is thus capitalized.
It doesn't cost you the entire contents of your bank account if someone figures out your MySpace credentials.
It's simply a matter of going after the most important phishing first... At least, it should be. Neopets, for example, actually gets you to enter your username, then displays a page with some information about your account on it. Only then can you enter your password, after you've confirmed you're talking to the real Neopets homepage. One seriously has to wonder what's up when Neopets has better phishing prevention than your average bank...
Seems so appropriate
Last I checked, Brazil referred to a country ONLY, and there was no continent named Zimbabwe. However, we have not one but three continents named "America" (North, Central, South)
The poster's point was simply to avoid ambiguity. When there are three continents and a country, all of which go by the same name (not to mention all the Other things named America) it's simply sensible to specify that you're talking about the United States of America. Remember that not all of Slashdot is from the USA, so not everybody is likely to immediately think of Mom, Apple Pie and the Statue of Liberty when they hear "America".
I can do this one better. I signed up for some game known as MapleStory a while back, submitting the password "DaedAEcarECel40s".
I quickly found that I could not log on to my account. I was wondering whether I misspelled my password or something, when I noticed (while reading the FAQ) in small print "Passwords must be 8 characters or less." Now, no warning of this was given anywhere on the sign up form.
In shock, I realized what the issue must have been. Sure enough, trying to log on with password "DaedAEca" worked like a charm.
Yes, not only did they not warn the user that there was a maximum on the password length while signing up, and not only did their form accept my 16-char password, but it actually would not let me log in with the full password. Man, I was pissed and confused for a while...
That would simply be a Mistake of fact. From Wikipedia:
"A defendant goes into a supermarket and places eight items in a basket which is presented to the cashier for payment in the usual way. Both honestly believe that all eight items have been scanned, and the defendant pays the sum shown on the bill. A store detective, however, notices that a mistake was made by the cashier so that only seven items were actually priced. This detective arrests the defendant after leaving the store. Since the defendant honestly believes that he has become the owner of goods in a sale transaction, he cannot form the mens rea for theft (which is usually dishonesty) when he physically removes them from the store. Accordingly, he should be acquitted."
Same here. If you honestly believed you were downloading legal, adult pornography, and someone slipped a few kiddie pics into there, you would have no mens rea for the crime and would be aquitted (asuming they couldn't prove you had used the pics, or that your belief that you weren't getting kiddie porn wasn't unreasonable. For example, if you downloaded everything from alt.sex.kids, you couldn't claim it was a mistake; since a reasonable person should have expected that they might get child porn from there.)
"What do I care?"
Umm... This is really an odd statement, here. What do you care that someone can convincingly file any sort of transaction under your name (SSN and Mother's Maiden Name). What do you care that someone could borrow $150,000, and put up your house as security. What do you care that someone could use your info to launder money, with a trail leading right to you when the feds look into it and an onus on you to prove it wasn't you?
Your signature isn't out there, correct. This also means that, when some guy turns up at an out-of-state (for you) bank and takes out a loan, the bank isn't comparing it either. If the guy has the SSN and MMN, he should be able to just scrawl down any signature, and to hell if it's yours. The bank'll believe him, hand him a bunch of cash that you'll later be liable for (or, at best, forced into lengthy and complicated legal proceedings just to have canceled).
In conclusion, I think you should very bloody well care. "Identity Borrowage" is one of the strangest ideas I've ever heard. It's like the argument regarding open wireless networks... "Why not leave my wireless network broadcasting to the world?" You'd probably well change that tune as soon as you were on the hook for someone's downloaded child porn or someone else's racked-up credit card debts in your name.
The problem with this is the bad press MS would get from announcing 11 exploits for every one they discovered. Those "outside the know" would think MS insecurity had gone up by 11x. MS already has major press issues about their many security exploits, they don't need 11 times that.
Also, introducing fake honey pots in the code would cause problems. If they announced it and fixed each one, the honey pots would be useless. If they announced it but didn't fix it, they'd look like they didn't care/or it would make it obvious it was a honey pot. If they didn't announce it or fix it, then invariably some security researcher would find it (it has to be discoverable to become a honey pot) and blast MS for the security vulnerability.
I'm surprised that whomever managed to crack into ASUS's servers only inserted malevolent HTML. Imagine the utter destruction they could have caused if they had *enhanced* the firmware downloads with some sort of (probably boot-sector) virus, or simply modified them to destroy the motherboard... *Shudder*
Why wouldn't they? Are the file images stored separately or otherwise better protected?
Sorry, but when someone's called on you to explain seemingly-illegally-copied code, telling them to "go fuck themselves" is not a bloody option. Try that in the real world sometime, and see how fast an indictment for copyright infringement and the corresponding civil suit comes flying in.
Also, you say he "kill[ed] a truly free implementation of the driver in question," you are totally missing the issue. The entire point of this debate is that the bloody driver wasn't free at all! It was GPL'd code, which gives you the rights to use it within the terms of the GPL. Stripping the legitimate author(s) name(s) from the code and relicensing it under a looser (or, in the case of the GPL, tighter) license is one of the main things the GPL and other licenses are designed to prevent.
I find it regrettable that Michael decided to go so public with this (indeed, as others pointed out, it could probably have been solved privately) but it is absolutely his right, as the "sorry little fuck" who owns the copyright on the code, to protect it as he sees fit. I think the OpenBSD team should be remarkably relieved that Michael diplomatically approached the issue and offered to assist in relicensing the code instead of simply suing Marcus and the other perpetrators of this infringement.
So stop heaping abuse on the guy simply because he chose to protect his legal right to have his original product (the code) used only under the license he selected for it and to not have it used outside those boundaries by anyone else, whether by accident or design. Instead, give him credit for offering to assist in reaching a constructive solution to the issue.
-- Andrew Morritt
Yep. Judging by quality of BSD and the LSD usage rates in California, the developers of BSD were seeing *quite* a few different colours...
The Brits certainly did show themselves willing to totally ignore civil liberties in dealing with the IRA, such as when the SAS was given total shoot-to-kill authority in dealings in Northern Ireland.
Also, You might want to Check Out Similasan #3 Eye Drops... Says it reduces Eye-Fatigue.
--AndrewM
At Ac Lensthey are selling Computer Vision Glasses.
Quote: "These glasses have a special tint that helps to reduce glare and the intensity of the light produced by the average computer monitor, and a special UV coating that blocks UV rays produced by monitors and flourescent lighting." Sounds like Just what you're looking for to me.
Also, You might want to look into getting a Glare Screen, there's a good one at
FutureShop.
Quote Again: "VisionGuard XL, Glare Filter with Radiation Barrier. Relieves eye strain for healthy vision. Reduces glare up to 99%. Fits regular and Flat screen monitors 14 " to 17"." Looks again like it will solve your problem. AndrewM
You might want to check out The Art Of Turboing. It explains what to do when you can't get a good answer From Tech Support Pretty well. Also, for an example of really bad Tech Support, see CompUSA: How not to handle a turboing customer
Stick the Disks/HD in a Safety Deposit Box at a bank. Volia! Instant Security.
AndrewM
You have many options in this situation other then an online backup:
*Buy another HardDrive and occasionally sync the two with Norton Ghost or something similar.
*Buy a Zip Drive and and a few 750mb Zip Disks, and split the file(s) to fit the Disks.
*Do the Same as above, but with a tape drive.
*Maybe set up something with a Friend, you each give each other FTP access to a folder on your server, and you can upload to each other's computers.
If you really want to use an online backup provider, try XDrive. Pretty Good, 500mb for $10.
AndrewM
FreeBSD is free, and , in my personal oppinion, quite as good as Linux with none of the comercialization (No, I am NOT trying to start a flamewar). Most Linux Programms will also run on FreeBSD Including Apache and Oracle as long as you install Linux Binary Emulation. For a production enviroment, you should use FreeBSD 4.8 ~STABLE, is is very stable.
There's my two cents.
Andrew
I think that this game, Tabula Rasa, Is going to be a best seller. Look at it. It's made by a guy with a solid reputation (He brought us Ultima!), and by combining that with today's cutting-edge graphics technologies, It's bound to be good. I don't play any games like this, but I know people who do, and I'd bet they'ed sink thier money into this. Rock on, Richard!
I find it very interesting that this guy accually created this thing. And, I Never knew that phone cables had four minicables. What I want to know is 1:Why did he create this thing as an attachment for LCDproc . Why not standalone? (unless he didn't know how too, In wich case I understand). and 2: Why only for Linux/BSD? Oh yeah. LCDproc only works on Linux and BSD. But why not write a windows version? But why not write a windows version? Anyways, good job to him.
Oh well.If Canada refuses to input biometrics,
I guess I'm going to need a visa. But, since Canada is USA Junior, I doubt
That Canada will acually refuse. I can just see it now. My passport embedded with my
retnia scans, finderprints, a small tape containing a voice sample, programming
ability, level of nerdity, and my Slashdot Karma Rating.
Oh ****. How much again does a plane ticket to Ugoslavia cost?
DOH! Note to Self: Use Preview
That's a good point. I have no proof that I own this computer that I'm typing on. I have no receipt for it. But I have been using it for a year. So you might think I own it.
--Begin News Story-- This was copied and pasted from the news story that the article linked to. I take no Credit. The dream of e-government has hit a brick wall because, incredibly, Parliament's Internet domain - www.parliament.uk - doesn't actually exist. The anomaly has come to light after Parliament's Publications and Archive arm attempted to make way for e-purchases. You are able to view recent Parliament reports online for free but if you wish to purchase a printed version of a report or copies of old legislation, you have to send a cheque to Parliament. The publications arm applied for an SSL certificate from leading supplier Thwate to provide a route for secure online transactions. Unfortunately, Thwate has insisted that it be provided with proof that Parliament actually owns parliament.uk. And no one is able to give it. UK domain registrar Nominet runs most .uk domains but not parliament.uk, which was registered before Nominet existed.
Equally, UKERNA - which was the precursor to Nominet and still runs the government and academic domains .gov.uk and .ac.uk - confirmed that it didn't look after parliament.uk. In fact, no one runs parliament.uk and it doesn't officially exist.
The extensive domain, which contains all official information regarding MPs, the House of Commons, House of Lords, UK legislation and just about everything else about the running of the United Kingdom, lives in the shadowlands of the Internet.
The domain itself is one of a very rare breed registered before 1 August 1996, before Nominet existed and when plain .uk addresses were still available. In fact, just 13 .uk Internet domains now officially exist, of which only six are still accessible (libraries and nuclear fusion research labs).
Then there are the second-level domain names like .co.uk, .govt.uk. There are 11 of these. Six are run by Nominet, two by UKERNA, nhs.uk by the National Health Service, .police.uk by the police and .mod.uk by the Ministry of Defence.
Parliament.uk exists in no man's land.
Surely this can be easily sorted out though? Well, no. Nominet has no control over the domain and a court case last year actually decided that there was no contract between Nominet and the registrants of domain names registered by the "Naming Committee" - the loose assortment of tech-heads that existed prior to Nominet.
It also has nothing to do with IANA or ICANN - the people behind the global domain names like .com and .org - because the UK domain system is strictly autonomous to it.
The .uk names that do still exist don't pay anything for their domains and have permanent control over them. However, they can't transfer them and no one can buy them. Nominet would like them to register with it but it has no powers to make them and if they do, they would have to pay regular renewal fees.
Nominet is also about as likely to want to charge Parliament for its domain as it is the MoD or itself for its nic.uk domains.
So what can Parliament do about its predicament? It is extremely unlikely that it will want to hand over the running of the domain to anyone else, but then there is no strict way of proving its owns the domain either.
A Nominet spokeswoman told us Nominet is "in contact" with Parliament and will confirm to anyone that asks that Parliament owns parliament.uk but has no plans to do anything about the odd situation.
Parliament will no doubt take months to get back to our queries and presumably just as long to assure Thawte that it is who it says it is. In the meantime, online sales of government publications are on the back burner.
--End News Story--
So... Parliament's website dosen't exist... Interesting. Or just plain weird, depending on how you look at it. I wonder what Parliament is going to do. Register a New domain,maybe? But what about all the people who have the old page bookmarked?
Weird.
Andrew.
Well, this dicussion seems to have found more holes in the internet tax than swiss cheese. I hope someone in the Californian Government reads Slashdot!