I hate to call BS on this one, but BS. It wasn't a EULA he click-agreed to; it wasn't even a confidentiality agreement, assignment of invention or other document. The NDA is a *gasp* non-dislcosure agreement which I would hope a reasonably educated person would understand. To take something you had to NDA to access, and then share via a poorly understood P2P application, then claim youthful stupidity is, well, stupid.
If the EULA, NDA and other agreements he had to read were too much for him to comprehend, he should have taken that as a sign... perhaps something as complex is medicince is out of his league
Since the idea seems to be recouping costs associated with damage to roads, which would seem to be at least partially dependent on the vehicles weight, it would make far more sense to factor the vehicles weight into this "tax." I could almost get behind the idea of a per-gallon tax (at a lower rate) for the environmental impact of burning gas (win for the hybrids and others), plus a (per-mile * weight) tax to cover the costs of roadway maintainence. And since vehicles have to be registered every year, seems like a straight odometer check would be accurate enough
it may be incredibly heavy by earth measure, but the suit also includes a personalized liquid cooling system, thermal protection for the extreme temperature differences between sun and shade, and a pretty serious amount of puncture protection. While it may not fit the bill for hiking across the mars terrain, it does offer some serious advantages over what sounds like an incredibly complex and complicated applied second skin. having worn one (attended space camp far too many years ago), i'd have to say that i much prefer it to a wet suit.
i don't think that 'grow up' is entirely accurate, nor do i think geek is really a clique. in this case 'geek' is roughly translatable to 'technically knowledgable in thing X,' and in that definition, management is most certainly where geeks go to die. of course, if liking to associate with other technically skilled individuals makes for a clique, then yes, please count me in.
Remember this: Management is where geeks go to have their ideals ground into a fine powder and refined to something for Product Marketing to consume
Uh, actually, Apple did do something for the 20th... it is known as the 20th Anniversary Mac (TAM), http://tam.axon.net/, and has something of a cult following (it being a low-end 604e and all).
I've been in QA for just over 8 years now, with the last 4 being devoted to web application QA, and the last 2 with an eye towards "security" type testing. This is definately a clean attack, albeit poorly reported and of questionable value due to the random nature of the returned data. While some will see this as a pure developer failure for failing to sufficiently parse the input, as was mentioned, this was only brought about by the malformed request from a incompletely written homegrown emailer. I would expect and assume *most* testing organizations would miss this type of issue, and in some cases, I would expect that this would be extremely complex to resolve, and in most cases, the desire to resolve the issue will usually be overridden by the "business" needs of releasing software.
Ok, so I know its slightly OT, but along the lines of IE doing some really strange things is this one.
Create a.txt file that contains a JS function of choice inside of either a script tag or in a body tag. Opening that file in IE will result in the JS firing as though it were a fully-formatted HTML doc. I'm having a hard time deciding if that's a bug or a feature
actually, the URL exploit requires the JS function location.unescape to function. Spoofing what is shown in the status bar also requires that JS be enabled.
That said, most users aren't capable of locating the specific settings in IE (since MS decided to call it Active Scripting). And even if they did turn JS off in their browser, not being able to connect to sites like Hotmail, or use any of the JS dependent features on the internet would likely make them re-enable it.
Slashdot Mirror
If the EULA, NDA and other agreements he had to read were too much for him to comprehend, he should have taken that as a sign... perhaps something as complex is medicince is out of his league
it may be incredibly heavy by earth measure, but the suit also includes a personalized liquid cooling system, thermal protection for the extreme temperature differences between sun and shade, and a pretty serious amount of puncture protection. While it may not fit the bill for hiking across the mars terrain, it does offer some serious advantages over what sounds like an incredibly complex and complicated applied second skin. having worn one (attended space camp far too many years ago), i'd have to say that i much prefer it to a wet suit.
Remember this: Management is where geeks go to have their ideals ground into a fine powder and refined to something for Product Marketing to consume
- smarmy sig once again omitted
Uh, actually, Apple did do something for the 20th... it is known as the 20th Anniversary Mac (TAM), http://tam.axon.net/, and has something of a cult following (it being a low-end 604e and all).
- smarmy sig omitted
I've been in QA for just over 8 years now, with the last 4 being devoted to web application QA, and the last 2 with an eye towards "security" type testing. This is definately a clean attack, albeit poorly reported and of questionable value due to the random nature of the returned data. While some will see this as a pure developer failure for failing to sufficiently parse the input, as was mentioned, this was only brought about by the malformed request from a incompletely written homegrown emailer. I would expect and assume *most* testing organizations would miss this type of issue, and in some cases, I would expect that this would be extremely complex to resolve, and in most cases, the desire to resolve the issue will usually be overridden by the "business" needs of releasing software.
Create a .txt file that contains a JS function of choice inside of either a script tag or in a body tag. Opening that file in IE will result in the JS firing as though it were a fully-formatted HTML doc. I'm having a hard time deciding if that's a bug or a feature
actually, the URL exploit requires the JS function location.unescape to function. Spoofing what is shown in the status bar also requires that JS be enabled. That said, most users aren't capable of locating the specific settings in IE (since MS decided to call it Active Scripting). And even if they did turn JS off in their browser, not being able to connect to sites like Hotmail, or use any of the JS dependent features on the internet would likely make them re-enable it.