Here's the text that prompted me into give away my personal info:)
Important News About Your Bank Account
To whom it may concern;
In cooperation with the Department Of Homeland Security, Federal, State and Local Governments your account has been denied insurance from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation due to suspected violations of the Patriot Act. While we have only a limited amount of evidence gathered on your account at this time it is enough to suspect that currency violations may have occurred in your account and due to this activity we have withdrawn Federal Deposit Insurance on your account until we verify that your account has not been used in a violation of the Patriot Act.
As a result Department Of Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge has advised the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation to suspend all deposit insurance on your account until such time as we can verify your identity and your account information.
Please verify through our IDVerify below. This information will be checked against a federal government database for identity verification. This only takes up to a minute and when we have verified your identity you will be notified of said verification and all suspensions of insurance on your account will be lifted.
http://www.fdic.gov/idverify/cgi-bin/index.htm
Failure to use IDVerify below will cause all insurance for your account to be terminated and all records of your account history will be sent to the Federal Bureau of Investigation in Washington D.C. for analysis and verification. Failure to provide proper identity may also result in a visit from Local, State or Federal Government or Homeland Security Officials.
Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter.
Mmmh... i believe you may be wrong: 1. The IE flaw doesn't originate from the link itself; from what i can gather, when the user clicks on the link, the flaw allows to change the URL from 201.213.whatever to "www.fdic.org" in the Address bar, hence fooling the user into thinking he/she is on the FDIC site.
2. http://[username]:[password]@www.something.com _is_ treated as a logon sequence.
No offense intended Jug, just mentioning it for information purposes. G'day!
Mmmmh... this is so integrated into my daily routine, that i may have trouble conveying my point.
For starters, i have an incredibly hard time conceiving that we could reach a point where "there [wouldn't be] no software available".
Anyway, let's say for the sake of argumentation that there is no more software _development_ being done due to lack of funding (meaning the only software remaining is the one already out there), i would believe there would still be opportunities for those people to support or use the software, no?
A great deal of OSS require maintenance, support and tailoring, and i don't mean software upgrade or patching, but maintenance, support and tailoring when _using_ the developed software; i would presume this could insure an income, no?
How do most of people using proprietary software earn a living? By _using_ the software; it isn't not much different than _you_ guys;).
Like proprietary solutions, there are only a handful of people who actually contribute fully to core development, the rest of us are mere users; however we have the added bonus of having the possibility to learn from the open code, in the hope of contributing ourselves someday.
I suspect most people developing open-source solutions don't do it full-time, they are also consultants for enterprises using the software. I can easily picture a web server developer working for a web-host company, or someone developping a firewall working as a security consultant.
It's simply a transfer from a product-based business to a service-based one: instead of making money off a product, you offer it for free and you earn a living offering services to support or actually use the software you're developing. And from a user standpoint, who's better to make proposal and improve on a given piece of software than the one using it? Or from a developer one, who's better at understanding a program than the developer him/herself?
Open-source is definitely a valid business model, we're not communist, penniless, command-line hippies (no offense, all fun and games:)
Slashdot Mirror
Here's the text that prompted me into give away my personal info :)
Important News About Your Bank Account
To whom it may concern;
In cooperation with the Department Of Homeland Security, Federal, State and Local Governments your account has been denied insurance from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation due to suspected violations of the Patriot Act. While we have only a limited amount of evidence gathered on your account at this time it is enough to suspect that currency violations may have occurred in your account and due to this activity we have withdrawn Federal Deposit Insurance on your account until we verify that your account has not been used in a violation of the Patriot Act.
As a result Department Of Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge has advised the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation to suspend all deposit insurance on your account until such time as we can verify your identity and your account information.
Please verify through our IDVerify below. This information will be checked against a federal government database for identity verification. This only takes up to a minute and when we have verified your identity you will be notified of said verification and all suspensions of insurance on your account will be lifted.
http://www.fdic.gov/idverify/cgi-bin/index.htm
Failure to use IDVerify below will cause all insurance for your account to be terminated and all records of your account history will be sent to the Federal Bureau of Investigation in Washington D.C. for analysis and verification. Failure to provide proper identity may also result in a visit from Local, State or Federal Government or Homeland Security Officials.
Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter.
Donald E. Powell
Chairman Emeritus FDIC
John D. Hawke, Jr.
Comptroller of the Currency
Michael E. Bartell
Chief Information Officer
Mmmh... i believe you may be wrong:
1. The IE flaw doesn't originate from the link itself; from what i can gather, when the user clicks on the link, the flaw allows to change the URL from 201.213.whatever to "www.fdic.org" in the Address bar, hence fooling the user into thinking he/she is on the FDIC site.
2. http://[username]:[password]@www.something.com _is_ treated as a logon sequence.
No offense intended Jug, just mentioning it for information purposes. G'day!
(cordiality is given when earned :)
Mmmmh... this is so integrated into my daily routine, that i may have trouble conveying my point.
For starters, i have an incredibly hard time conceiving that we could reach a point where "there [wouldn't be] no software available".
Anyway, let's say for the sake of argumentation that there is no more software _development_ being done due to lack of funding (meaning the only software remaining is the one already out there), i would believe there would still be opportunities for those people to support or use the software, no?
A great deal of OSS require maintenance, support and tailoring, and i don't mean software upgrade or patching, but maintenance, support and tailoring when _using_ the developed software; i would presume this could insure an income, no?
How do most of people using proprietary software earn a living? By _using_ the software; it isn't not much different than _you_ guys ;).
:)
Like proprietary solutions, there are only a handful of people who actually contribute fully to core development, the rest of us are mere users; however we have the added bonus of having the possibility to learn from the open code, in the hope of contributing ourselves someday.
I suspect most people developing open-source solutions don't do it full-time, they are also consultants for enterprises using the software. I can easily picture a web server developer working for a web-host company, or someone developping a firewall working as a security consultant.
It's simply a transfer from a product-based business to a service-based one: instead of making money off a product, you offer it for free and you earn a living offering services to support or actually use the software you're developing. And from a user standpoint, who's better to make proposal and improve on a given piece of software than the one using it? Or from a developer one, who's better at understanding a program than the developer him/herself?
Open-source is definitely a valid business model, we're not communist, penniless, command-line hippies (no offense, all fun and games