I work on a large government network. If there were no logs there would be serious problems. Everything is kept for auditing by higher headquarters.
Administrators don't work for students - they work for the administration. It's not in a sysadmin's job description to cover up for kids.
I'm not arguing the morality of p2p - it doesn't affect me. What I am arguing is that a sysadmin should be logging anything that can cause liability to his employer - who in this case is the school adminstration, not the students.
Just my opinion, though. Agreeing to disagree is just fine with me:)
Probably not - chances are the college student will end up filing for bankruptcy, get his credit destroyed, become ineligible for student loansand maybe have to quit school - but will remain eligible to make easy monthly payments to the RIAA for the next ten years.
Actobat has had these features for years. I find it interesting that all the howling begins when MS decides to follow suit.
Anybody with more than cursory Acrobat experience knows you can restrict reading, editing, printing and even the Windows clipboard when you create a PDF.
I think this will greatly increase the need for an Open Source anti-virus scanner.
I don't mean to sound dense, really - but I don't understand how you can create an open-source virus scanner. Wouldn't virus authors also have access to the source code?
What I don't get is why RIAA doesn't just embrace the technology instead of fighting it.
They're fighting a losing battle. Corporate America can't keep up the technology - so rather than see profits eaten by file sharing, why not make the technology work for them instead of dragging a buncha people into court?
I'd pay for a high-quality digital copy of an album.
That is a rather large assumption. The Windows XP activation scheme has been cracked since day one. For a popular product, activation means that less illicit use rather than no illicit use.
Granted. I shouldn't speak in absolutes:)
But - I don't think the average person sharing software has the chutzpah to crack WPA - or would even know where to look for a crack. It's not like it was in the old days where you bought a CD, installed the software on all your machines and then loaned the CD to two or three friends.
I'm not gonna argue that MS' 50% piracy rate for earlier versions of Windows is accurate - I think it's probably a bit low. My point was that if MS (and now Symantec) factored in the price of development, distribution and piracy with earlier versions of software and then through some sort of product activation doubled the number of licensed copies they didn't double their profits - they increased them a heck of a lot more than that.
I mentioned this in a seminar in Redmond when we were discussing MS product activation and Windows XP.
I'll admit that software companies are entitled to make a profit. I'll even admit that they have the right to license every copy of that software that's in use if that's the model they choose.
I won't argue MS' claim that about half the commercial software in use is pirated - but:
Since these companies are showing a profit now, the price of piracy is clearly built into the software now. If product activation is effective then the previously unregistered copies that get purchased are clearly pure profit for the software manufacturer.
Everyone pays the price for software piracy - so I'd like to ask Symantec the same question I asked Microsoft a couple years ago - are you going to reduce the price of your products now that all those previously unregistered copies are bought and paid for?
Anything else seems like a grab for profit under the guise of protecting intellectual property.
I'm a bass player and have occasionally used a pitch processor.
Vibrato, bending and slides are possible with a pitch processor because once you're outside of the device's set tolerance the device will just let the note pass. Even fretless instruments work just fine.
With my own gear I can tell the difference between a processed note and a real one - but in a live performance I doubt many people could.
They're kinda useful for me if I just put on a new set of strings and things haven't settled in quite yet - a pitch processor will keep me accurate since tuning in the middle of a song is sorta unprofessional:)
Although you can use one to transpose music to another key if you wanted to, an earlier poster's comment about the more you correct the worse it sound is spot on. You're not gonna make a singer who sounds like someone beating a cat come off like Celine Dion.
Or maybe you could:)
Slashdot Mirror
I work on a large government network. If there were no logs there would be serious problems. Everything is kept for auditing by higher headquarters.
Administrators don't work for students - they work for the administration. It's not in a sysadmin's job description to cover up for kids.
I'm not arguing the morality of p2p - it doesn't affect me. What I am arguing is that a sysadmin should be logging anything that can cause liability to his employer - who in this case is the school adminstration, not the students.
Just my opinion, though. Agreeing to disagree is just fine with me :)
Do I win? :)
I don't feed donuts to my servers.
Also, there's no right to privacy on any network - unless you own it.
Probably not - chances are the college student will end up filing for bankruptcy, get his credit destroyed, become ineligible for student loansand maybe have to quit school - but will remain eligible to make easy monthly payments to the RIAA for the next ten years.
Anybody with more than cursory Acrobat experience knows you can restrict reading, editing, printing and even the Windows clipboard when you create a PDF.
In addition to user settings the signature file determines the scan engine's behavior.
Thank you, Ren :)
I don't mean to sound dense, really - but I don't understand how you can create an open-source virus scanner. Wouldn't virus authors also have access to the source code?
They're fighting a losing battle. Corporate America can't keep up the technology - so rather than see profits eaten by file sharing, why not make the technology work for them instead of dragging a buncha people into court?
I'd pay for a high-quality digital copy of an album.
Granted. I shouldn't speak in absolutes :)
But - I don't think the average person sharing software has the chutzpah to crack WPA - or would even know where to look for a crack. It's not like it was in the old days where you bought a CD, installed the software on all your machines and then loaned the CD to two or three friends.
I'm not gonna argue that MS' 50% piracy rate for earlier versions of Windows is accurate - I think it's probably a bit low. My point was that if MS (and now Symantec) factored in the price of development, distribution and piracy with earlier versions of software and then through some sort of product activation doubled the number of licensed copies they didn't double their profits - they increased them a heck of a lot more than that.
I mentioned this in a seminar in Redmond when we were discussing MS product activation and Windows XP. I'll admit that software companies are entitled to make a profit. I'll even admit that they have the right to license every copy of that software that's in use if that's the model they choose. I won't argue MS' claim that about half the commercial software in use is pirated - but: Since these companies are showing a profit now, the price of piracy is clearly built into the software now. If product activation is effective then the previously unregistered copies that get purchased are clearly pure profit for the software manufacturer. Everyone pays the price for software piracy - so I'd like to ask Symantec the same question I asked Microsoft a couple years ago - are you going to reduce the price of your products now that all those previously unregistered copies are bought and paid for? Anything else seems like a grab for profit under the guise of protecting intellectual property.
I'm a bass player and have occasionally used a pitch processor. Vibrato, bending and slides are possible with a pitch processor because once you're outside of the device's set tolerance the device will just let the note pass. Even fretless instruments work just fine. With my own gear I can tell the difference between a processed note and a real one - but in a live performance I doubt many people could. They're kinda useful for me if I just put on a new set of strings and things haven't settled in quite yet - a pitch processor will keep me accurate since tuning in the middle of a song is sorta unprofessional :)
Although you can use one to transpose music to another key if you wanted to, an earlier poster's comment about the more you correct the worse it sound is spot on. You're not gonna make a singer who sounds like someone beating a cat come off like Celine Dion.
Or maybe you could :)