I'm surprised no one has mentioned the obvious here. First of all, how many people have actually worked with any of those geniuses who know every technology under the sun? Now, how many people have worked with people so incompetent you can't imagine how they were ever hired and then despondent because those same people also hired you? It doesn't add up, does it?
The interviews are designed to legally discriminate. They are used to turn candidates into rejects. There is no law that says people who are hired must have all of those skills. But anyone who doesn't have every skill is legally a candidate for rejection. This allows employers to hire according to race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, personal acquaintance, or just about any other criteria. That is the way the system works people.
I said nothing about Google being "evil". Google is just providing more value to its customers. Google most definitely does not want ads to be able to access the rest of your browser information. That information should only come from Google, properly anonymized and billed. While this change would make it harder for malicious iframes to sniff data that doesn't belong to them, it would also give malicious iframes more opportunities to inject code. Currently, if such an iframe tried that and failed, it will kill the parent process, effectively ending the injection attempts. With the new system, multiple iframes could keep trying different tactics.
Yep, they were sending login information over plain http.
The author of the original article was very careful with what he did and didn't say. He didn't say that Apple sent login information over plain http. And if you read the support document where Elie Bursztein gets his 15 seconds of Apple fame, you will see that Apple says the update now encrypts "active content". In short, login information was never sent over plain text.
I didn't see anything on the JSTOR Alumni program page that said alumni had the right to hide their faces from security cameras, break into networking cabinets, jack into the gigabit ethernet switch, spoof their MAC address via a randomizer script, and bring down JSTOR access for their entire institution.
is why the mysterious Pamela Jones and the rest of the open-source community has identified Apple as The Great Satan. What has Apple ever done to hurt them? Complied with the GPL? OK. Guilty as charged. People who love their Apple devices get derided as fanbois. People who hate, without ever being harmed, are the good guys?
I can't remotely log in to my Linux machines and do programming on my iPad. I can't create presentations on it. I can't do photo editing or drawing. I can write papers for grad school.
No. wait. I can do all of those thing on my 1st gen iPad.
I had a report of problems with a web sites from users who may or may not have been using IE9. So, I fired up my Windows 7 VM to check and it was still running IE8. What? No problem. That is why I installed it this VM. I just searched for "ie9" in my IE8 browser. Bing couldn't find a download link for IE9. It was Google's top hit.
The patent system is designed to facilitate copying. It gives the patent holder a temporary, legal monopoly to encourage innovation. After the patent expires, it's fair game. The idea of patents is great, but everyone acknowledges the system needs reform. Maybe this case will make that happen. Would that be so bad?
When it costs a small developer millions of dollars to patent search and licence obvious designs, we have killed innovation.
What we need is a company that stands up for small developers. Someone that frees them from credit card merchant companies. Someone that will go to court and defend small developers against patent trolls!
I think one of the reasons for the re-wording was to remove the word "viruses" since it so obviously confuses people who don't know the difference between viruses and trojans and think the handful of Mac malware in 12 years is equivalent to over 17,000,000 for Windows. Sorry, but market-share doesn't account for that discrepancy.
It is precisely those unequivocal words like "nothing" that get people into trouble. Let's just say that there is only one thing more secure about MacOS X than Windows - the architecture.
This is just the typical "Apple effect". Apple uses industry standard marketing tactics and gets in trouble. Everyone conveniently fails to notice that that the "non-4G" iPad3 is 6 times faster than the old iPad. Any other company would have gotten away with marketing just that as 4G even without LTE.
We shouldn't read Florian Mueller because he takes money from Oracle. OK. Does that mean that we shouldn't listen to the FSF and Harvard's Berkman Center for Internet and Society because they take money from Google?
I have a book in the iBookstore. I set the price on it. Apple sells it for that price and gives me 70%.
I have the same book in the other bookstores. I have no control over the price. They give me what they want, which is half of what Apple gives me. I have no choice or say in the matter.
And the Department of Justice sues Apple? That's just wrong.
Like many Dreamhost customers, I have used many other hosts over the years. None has even come close to Dreamhost. Many companies try to project an aura of professionalism but are really mickey mouse operations on the inside. Dreamhost is the opposite. I think they make a point to act like clowns only to scare off the clueless, high-maintenance market.
The massive web hosting companies don't run vanilla Linux. The require custom setups to run hundreds or thousands of sites per server and the flexibility to change servers based on usage.
Alas, Dreamhost markets to the public at large, who often have no idea anything other than FTP exists. Dreamhost also provides sftp, ssh, WebDAV, and secure e-mail.
If Apple is spying on the US government, obviously I don't want to do business with Apple anymore. Can Slashdot readers to help me choose a new manufacturer, operating system, and e-mail? From the evidence presented in this document, we know that RIM and Nokia have also provided backdoors. Is there any mobile device manufacturer that can replace both my iPhone and my iPad and hasn't been proven by this document to spy on my government? Before you answer, remember that it isn't just the manufacturer I need to be worried about. Unless the operating system is completely free and open source software, I could never be sure. Obviously I will need a FLOSS OS too. Finally, I will need an e-mail service to replace ICloud. Can anyone recommend a generous, stable, and free e-mail service that can use the impenetrable POP protocol? I would prefer if the e-mail service provider in question was an outspoken opponent of the proposed Stop Online Privacy Act. Can anyone recommend a solution that meets all of these requirements? Anyone?
GPL is best for companies using it as a service. They can take the GPL'ed code, make proprietary changes to it, and then use that software to sell services and/or advertising to people using free services. This is the best way to profit from GPL. As long as they aren't "copying" the GPL'ed software, they have no obligation to release any changes or derived software.
Zittrain and the rest of the Berkman Center are just shills for Google. The FSF isn't far behind. Open source should be about programmers freely sharing knowledge, not about controlling people.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm surprised no one has mentioned the obvious here. First of all, how many people have actually worked with any of those geniuses who know every technology under the sun? Now, how many people have worked with people so incompetent you can't imagine how they were ever hired and then despondent because those same people also hired you? It doesn't add up, does it? The interviews are designed to legally discriminate. They are used to turn candidates into rejects. There is no law that says people who are hired must have all of those skills. But anyone who doesn't have every skill is legally a candidate for rejection. This allows employers to hire according to race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, personal acquaintance, or just about any other criteria. That is the way the system works people.
I said nothing about Google being "evil". Google is just providing more value to its customers. Google most definitely does not want ads to be able to access the rest of your browser information. That information should only come from Google, properly anonymized and billed. While this change would make it harder for malicious iframes to sniff data that doesn't belong to them, it would also give malicious iframes more opportunities to inject code. Currently, if such an iframe tried that and failed, it will kill the parent process, effectively ending the injection attempts. With the new system, multiple iframes could keep trying different tactics.
I think defeating ad-blocking and enhanced ad management are one of the primary reasons for the fork.
The first thing Google lists for architectural changes is support for out-of-process iframes
Ah, I see. "Out-of-Process frames" means better management of advertising.
Yep, they were sending login information over plain http.
The author of the original article was very careful with what he did and didn't say. He didn't say that Apple sent login information over plain http. And if you read the support document where Elie Bursztein gets his 15 seconds of Apple fame, you will see that Apple says the update now encrypts "active content". In short, login information was never sent over plain text.
I didn't see anything on the JSTOR Alumni program page that said alumni had the right to hide their faces from security cameras, break into networking cabinets, jack into the gigabit ethernet switch, spoof their MAC address via a randomizer script, and bring down JSTOR access for their entire institution.
is why the mysterious Pamela Jones and the rest of the open-source community has identified Apple as The Great Satan. What has Apple ever done to hurt them? Complied with the GPL? OK. Guilty as charged. People who love their Apple devices get derided as fanbois. People who hate, without ever being harmed, are the good guys?
I can't remotely log in to my Linux machines and do programming on my iPad. I can't create presentations on it. I can't do photo editing or drawing. I can write papers for grad school.
No. wait. I can do all of those thing on my 1st gen iPad.
Nevermind.
I say if Mathgen can get three such articles accepted this year, then it should get tenure.
I had a report of problems with a web sites from users who may or may not have been using IE9. So, I fired up my Windows 7 VM to check and it was still running IE8. What? No problem. That is why I installed it this VM. I just searched for "ie9" in my IE8 browser. Bing couldn't find a download link for IE9. It was Google's top hit.
The patent system is designed to facilitate copying. It gives the patent holder a temporary, legal monopoly to encourage innovation. After the patent expires, it's fair game. The idea of patents is great, but everyone acknowledges the system needs reform. Maybe this case will make that happen. Would that be so bad?
When it costs a small developer millions of dollars to patent search and licence obvious designs, we have killed innovation.
What we need is a company that stands up for small developers. Someone that frees them from credit card merchant companies. Someone that will go to court and defend small developers against patent trolls!
Oh wait. That's Apple.
Never mind.
Funny how people went ballistic when Apple wanted to charge either $1 or 25 cents for Firewire, but now 2.5 % is considered "reasonable".
I think one of the reasons for the re-wording was to remove the word "viruses" since it so obviously confuses people who don't know the difference between viruses and trojans and think the handful of Mac malware in 12 years is equivalent to over 17,000,000 for Windows. Sorry, but market-share doesn't account for that discrepancy.
It is precisely those unequivocal words like "nothing" that get people into trouble. Let's just say that there is only one thing more secure about MacOS X than Windows - the architecture.
This is just the typical "Apple effect". Apple uses industry standard marketing tactics and gets in trouble. Everyone conveniently fails to notice that that the "non-4G" iPad3 is 6 times faster than the old iPad. Any other company would have gotten away with marketing just that as 4G even without LTE.
We shouldn't read Florian Mueller because he takes money from Oracle. OK. Does that mean that we shouldn't listen to the FSF and Harvard's Berkman Center for Internet and Society because they take money from Google?
I have a book in the iBookstore. I set the price on it. Apple sells it for that price and gives me 70%. I have the same book in the other bookstores. I have no control over the price. They give me what they want, which is half of what Apple gives me. I have no choice or say in the matter. And the Department of Justice sues Apple? That's just wrong.
Like many Dreamhost customers, I have used many other hosts over the years. None has even come close to Dreamhost. Many companies try to project an aura of professionalism but are really mickey mouse operations on the inside. Dreamhost is the opposite. I think they make a point to act like clowns only to scare off the clueless, high-maintenance market.
The massive web hosting companies don't run vanilla Linux. The require custom setups to run hundreds or thousands of sites per server and the flexibility to change servers based on usage.
Alas, Dreamhost markets to the public at large, who often have no idea anything other than FTP exists. Dreamhost also provides sftp, ssh, WebDAV, and secure e-mail.
If Apple is spying on the US government, obviously I don't want to do business with Apple anymore. Can Slashdot readers to help me choose a new manufacturer, operating system, and e-mail? From the evidence presented in this document, we know that RIM and Nokia have also provided backdoors. Is there any mobile device manufacturer that can replace both my iPhone and my iPad and hasn't been proven by this document to spy on my government? Before you answer, remember that it isn't just the manufacturer I need to be worried about. Unless the operating system is completely free and open source software, I could never be sure. Obviously I will need a FLOSS OS too. Finally, I will need an e-mail service to replace ICloud. Can anyone recommend a generous, stable, and free e-mail service that can use the impenetrable POP protocol? I would prefer if the e-mail service provider in question was an outspoken opponent of the proposed Stop Online Privacy Act. Can anyone recommend a solution that meets all of these requirements? Anyone?
Oh! Oh! Oh! Repost! Repost! Repost!
GPL is best for companies using it as a service. They can take the GPL'ed code, make proprietary changes to it, and then use that software to sell services and/or advertising to people using free services. This is the best way to profit from GPL. As long as they aren't "copying" the GPL'ed software, they have no obligation to release any changes or derived software.
Zittrain and the rest of the Berkman Center are just shills for Google. The FSF isn't far behind. Open source should be about programmers freely sharing knowledge, not about controlling people.