That's just ridiculous - looking at news.chinatimes.com, because the words news, china, and times are in English, can you assume that the website is written in English?
Practically all domain names are written in Roman characters - can we assume that they contain news pertaining to Italy?
Had your dad's company hired competent IT support, even his windows environment could be back up, fully functional, updated, and protected within an hour of starting the re-image. This is not even very dependant on OS platform, mostly storage size and speed. BTW; even an entry-level IT support contract would also include on-line, off-site backups and remote support. So, the total cost of 'free' IT support here is 7/8 working hours in a 'down' day, and probably far more affected days in the year.
Enterprise systems - those that are the market for the sales reps in question - are where it's worthwhile setting up AD to get even easier to manage with scale. Of course, somebody capable of doing that could likely also set up OpenLDAP and kerberos for a *NIX (including OS X) environment just as easily. The core knowledge and skills are not platform dependant. My point being that in either case, the difference in cost of hardware and licensing combined are going to be dwarfed by the cost of a competent admin, which will be pretty much the same for either platform; because the work-to-worker ratio is comparable. i.e. Unix support staff are comparatively rare, and so are unix environments.
The TCO comes in to the platform choice equation not on the admin side, but on the user side - if you need X people to do your work, and approximately X people in the local job market have the appropriate qualifications on one platform, while 10X people have the qualification on another; choosing the more broadly used platform saves you weeks of paid training time and months of lost efficiency, as well as giving you a 100x factor larger pool to try to entice people to work at a lower wage, ongoing. If you need to hire every applicant on the market qualified to do the job, you're going to be in a very weak bargaining position.
If you're pulling out those guns, I'd sooner see them aimed at Google, Facebook, and the telcos and *AAs of the world for forging that mile-wide trail well before Apple jumped on the bandwagon.
Story: Is Apple Turning Into the Next "Evil Empire"?
Subject: They already were?
They have been for a long time...
Is the correct answer.
--
Neither I nor the GP used the word "evil"
Possibly not, but you clearly implied it.
It never ceases to amaze me what ridiculous pro-Apple nonsense will get modded up on this site.
GP was blatantly incorrect, and clearly biased. I live in a relatively small town which recently increased to two (appropriately certified, warranty recommended etc.) non-Apple-owned Mac repair shops. Any Mac clones available in 1998 were either terrible products; clearly harming what little rep Apple had in the popular market and/or blatantly violating their appropriately registered, used, and protected trademarks and copyright. The part about business models doesn't make a whole lot of sense on its own; neither of you cite any specific examples of Microsoft-like ``evil'' behaviour to justify the implied label. Surely you have some at hand?
In other news, companies make money from consumers by building products they want and/or effectively marketing at price points consumers are willing to pay. OMFG get yer pitchforks! Call the FBI! Call the EFF! RICO! RICO!
When you build something you get to choose who you sell it to, and the conditions and purposes it is to be used for. That's what the Great Free Market is all about.
Clone makers are welcome to ship generic PCs loaded with FreeBSD, GNUStep, and LLVM/Clang to their hearts' content. Maybe when such machines grab a measurable percentage of the market, Apple will stop their 'evil' ways of... what was your argument?
If you really think that dictating the terms of use of your own product is evil; it's time to buy a bunch of transistors and solder up your own Internet.
Yeah, +1 Ask The Right Question...
A fixed microwave station on the side of a mountain is an obvious and easy target for anybody looking to suppress the flow of information.
Satellite phones, like cell phones, typically function as modems as either a configurable menu option; or via Plug-n-Pray USB. Couple of hundred dollars plus the plan, and you can stash it in a book, rock, or body cavity. Seems a lot easier and less risky (in an "if-we-see-you-subverting-us-we'll-shoot-you" way) than whatever it is the OP is implying.
Yes - maliciously interfering with the infrastructure of a sovereign nation is an act of war. Doing it surreptitiously through civilian channels makes it terrorism.
1: How can a judge force you to sign away your Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination to release this information? Just say no.
In this case, you've already done any incrimination when you made the statements - hiding them after the fact is not your constitutional right. Like a mobster doesn't have the right to not have a ledger he kept of his criminal undertakings used against him; just because it was hidden under the bed.
2: How is it so hard to argue that you have a reasonable expection of privacy in your comments rendering them inadmissible in court? After all, if they hadn't been private then the opposing lawyers wouldn't have needed court to force them to be revealed.
Continuing the above example, were the ledger in a safe that only he know the combination to; the 5th amendment may apply to forcing testimony of the safe's combination.
But if he used the ledger in front of the people that work for him; any of them can be asked if he kept a ledger, and if they say yes (there's a reasonable expectation that the safe's contents are related to the offence), the safe can just be cracked, and its contents used. If any of them know the combination, than can be required to provide it.
3: People lie in Facebook. Wow, that's news. People lie in real life too. It's all about keeping up appearances. Why isn't the case being made that what I said on FB was all lies intended towards keeping up appearances among my friends? Pictures? Yeah I can smile through the pain for a 1/60th of a second - so what?
People lie in financial accounts too - that's why it's called evidence, not facts. It's not taken completely in absence of context, nor as 100% reliable or tamper-safe; but the likelihood of your own account of your behaviour being accurate is generally high.
"Oh noes! When I make a statement on record it can be subpoenaed as evidence against me when I lie about it!"
This is not by any means new, or specific to Facebook. If you're planning to deceive somebody about something that could go to court, keep your records consistently on the message you're trying to pass off.
At our exams, it was always clearly explained in the handbook, in the starting announcements, and on the cover page of the top sheet on each desk's papers that phones and electronic devices are to be on the desk, screen up, and turned off; and that if you're found to be violating that rule it will be considered as evidence of 'possible cheating, or attempting to do so'.
It'd be difficult to misinterpret that.
Do any relevant institutions/not/ have similar rules and procedures?
Seems the cache link you provided has unfortunately also been updated. There's still the tell-tale 'leather case' tag on it, but that seems to be the only remaining reference.
TFA deleted. Seems to still have the old tags though...
POSTED BY CONNECTIFY AT 1:33 PM LABELS: AMAZON, CONNECTIFY, CRASH, KINDLE, LEATHER CASE, NON-LIGHTED
Undercover police are allowed to say they aren't cops. That's kind of the whole point.
Entrapment laws are to protect people from going to jail for something they wouldn't have done if they weren't asked to; not for something they wouldn't have done if they didn't think they could get away with it.
Found a clean copy of the text; have restored the embedded links here:
Hello, this is CygonX. Our Hosting Data Center has suffered a major disaster: Namely the FBI storming the Data Center and the company's owner's home (that's me). The FBI took an entire data center, hundreds of servers, routers, switches, UPS system, cabinets, monitors, printers, and even power strips...as evidence.
You would expect this kind of totalitarian storm-trooper activity in the name of the war on drugs, the war on terror, or etc. But the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation actually did NO investigation in this particular case. They took the statements of an ex-employees of the company, which was fired for drug use.
What were they looking for? Well that’s a tricky question, and I am not even sure they know, but the short answer is $6.1 Million Dollars. Hang in there, the story gets more interesting.
As many of you may know I have played the role of Administrator for the UWWWB forum, AKA CygonX for many years. Truthfully, CygonX was a lot like Santa Claus, and has actually been played by many people over the years in order to manage the site, but I am the original and current owner. My real name is Mike Faulkner, and I have hosted the Network Security forum and community at this domain name since sometime in early 2002. I was the CEO of a small tech company when I took over the site, and I hosted it off my own network on a pair of T1s. That company went under, taking most of my money with it, and UWWWB was actually hosted off a cable modem for a period of time from an equipment rack in my home. This is my forum and community that I have nourished for years.
Over the years, I have bought, sold, and built a large number of small tech companies. I worked my way up, with 100 hour work weeks, and by taking almost no money out personally for many years. For the past few years I have been a very active venture capitalist. Investing in various small technology businesses, and using them to support each other. My VoIP Companies used my Hosting Companies, which leased space in my Data Centers, and etc. This was the Crydon Capital Corporations family of companies. Crydon Technology, was the data center and hosting company that the FBI raided in Dallas March 12th, 2009. UWWWB was tucked away on a tiny server in the data center for years, and we never even got a single complaint from RIAA, or MPPA, or anyone. This is not just about UWWWB, although the FBI certainly is holding it against me for running a security site.
Here's what happened: March 12th, 2009, at about 5:AM in the morning, my home alarm system went off. I get up to see what’s going on, on maybe 3 hours of sleep, and my wife points out there are two people with flash lights in my back yard. Now, this may not be unusual for everyone, but I lived in a fairly nice home in Southlake Texas, the United States highest per-capita income city for 2008. A very nice community, virtually no crime, and excellent schools. That is to say, I did not live in a shack in the hood, this is nice suburbs, and not where the FBI usually does raids. So I run out the back door of my home, thinking I was about to confront some crackheads trying to steal the copper off my AC unit or something. And although I couldn’t quite see them yet I heard the very authoritative voice of what appeared to be law enforcement officers, with the radio noise to go with them. They proceeded with the expected dialogue, "stop", "show me your hands", "hands in the air" etc. They didn't shoot me, and sadly that really was the highlight of my day. I assumed my alarm had triggered by itself and the cops had been called, as we had problems with the alarm system before. They handcuffed me, while I was telling them I was the home owner. No big deal, they’ll figure it out in a second, right? It wasn't a false alarm on my home security system, the FBI had cut my phone lines.
When they brought me around to the front of my house, there was a very
This deeply saddens n3td3v because we believe that MPAA and RIAA are forces of good. They saved millions of lives. (n3td3v has lobbied for corporal punishment for trolls and torrent downloaders)
Yep, the google cache of a page printed to PDF and uploaded to Scribd. Some formatting is lost; try the text-only version from the google cache toolbar and copying into an editor (or otherwise removing the bright-green-ness of the text).
This is probably the most complete account of events, tied together with at least one side of the full story.
The debt in the millions was the operating costs of a failed business he was part owner of (not in itself illegal, unless you incur the debt deliberately); and he was not the cause of the business failing (in his own words). I didn't find any evidence of him being charged with wrongdoing over the operation of that business (brief google search)
He wasn't hiding overseas - he was never told to stay in the country, and informed the head of the FBIs investigation where he would be living, and who he would be working for. He never tried to change his identity.
Faulkner, who was a part owner of Premier Voice before selling it about a year ago, acknowledges that Premier owed money to AT&T at one time — though he says he’s not certain it was for interconnection. He says that debt was assumed by the new owner when he sold the company. Either way, he says, this would be categorized as corporate debt, not fraud.
"There’s a big difference between stealing money and owing money," he says.
Egh, that's it from me for now - some terrible bug in Chrome and/or Slashcode is making it a significant hassle to copy/paste stuff. Anyone else have similar issues? (I'm running current Chrome on OS X 10.6)
Any consumer network hardware you've picked up in the last decade or more will likely auto-sense using the incorrect pair and effectively add the required crossover; and only one device of the pair needs to support this.
This is so common, reliable (and useful) that it was added to the standard for gigabit.
Slashdot Mirror
That's just ridiculous - looking at news.chinatimes.com, because the words news, china, and times are in English, can you assume that the website is written in English?
Practically all domain names are written in Roman characters - can we assume that they contain news pertaining to Italy?
Had your dad's company hired competent IT support, even his windows environment could be back up, fully functional, updated, and protected within an hour of starting the re-image. This is not even very dependant on OS platform, mostly storage size and speed. BTW; even an entry-level IT support contract would also include on-line, off-site backups and remote support. So, the total cost of 'free' IT support here is 7/8 working hours in a 'down' day, and probably far more affected days in the year.
Enterprise systems - those that are the market for the sales reps in question - are where it's worthwhile setting up AD to get even easier to manage with scale. Of course, somebody capable of doing that could likely also set up OpenLDAP and kerberos for a *NIX (including OS X) environment just as easily. The core knowledge and skills are not platform dependant. My point being that in either case, the difference in cost of hardware and licensing combined are going to be dwarfed by the cost of a competent admin, which will be pretty much the same for either platform; because the work-to-worker ratio is comparable. i.e. Unix support staff are comparatively rare, and so are unix environments.
The TCO comes in to the platform choice equation not on the admin side, but on the user side - if you need X people to do your work, and approximately X people in the local job market have the appropriate qualifications on one platform, while 10X people have the qualification on another; choosing the more broadly used platform saves you weeks of paid training time and months of lost efficiency, as well as giving you a 100x factor larger pool to try to entice people to work at a lower wage, ongoing. If you need to hire every applicant on the market qualified to do the job, you're going to be in a very weak bargaining position.
No. If I want to have a Mac and my company forces me to use a Windows app, I won't be dual-booting just to run the company's app.
Your Intel Mac supports hardware virtualization.
If you're pulling out those guns, I'd sooner see them aimed at Google, Facebook, and the telcos and *AAs of the world for forging that mile-wide trail well before Apple jumped on the bandwagon.
Story: Is Apple Turning Into the Next "Evil Empire"?
Subject: They already were?
They have been for a long time...
Is the correct answer.
--
Neither I nor the GP used the word "evil"
Possibly not, but you clearly implied it.
It never ceases to amaze me what ridiculous pro-Apple nonsense will get modded up on this site.
GP was blatantly incorrect, and clearly biased. I live in a relatively small town which recently increased to two (appropriately certified, warranty recommended etc.) non-Apple-owned Mac repair shops. Any Mac clones available in 1998 were either terrible products; clearly harming what little rep Apple had in the popular market and/or blatantly violating their appropriately registered, used, and protected trademarks and copyright. The part about business models doesn't make a whole lot of sense on its own; neither of you cite any specific examples of Microsoft-like ``evil'' behaviour to justify the implied label. Surely you have some at hand?
In other news, companies make money from consumers by building products they want and/or effectively marketing at price points consumers are willing to pay. OMFG get yer pitchforks! Call the FBI! Call the EFF! RICO! RICO!
When you build something you get to choose who you sell it to, and the conditions and purposes it is to be used for. That's what the Great Free Market is all about.
Clone makers are welcome to ship generic PCs loaded with FreeBSD, GNUStep, and LLVM/Clang to their hearts' content. Maybe when such machines grab a measurable percentage of the market, Apple will stop their 'evil' ways of... what was your argument?
If you really think that dictating the terms of use of your own product is evil; it's time to buy a bunch of transistors and solder up your own Internet.
Yeah, +1 Ask The Right Question... A fixed microwave station on the side of a mountain is an obvious and easy target for anybody looking to suppress the flow of information. Satellite phones, like cell phones, typically function as modems as either a configurable menu option; or via Plug-n-Pray USB. Couple of hundred dollars plus the plan, and you can stash it in a book, rock, or body cavity. Seems a lot easier and less risky (in an "if-we-see-you-subverting-us-we'll-shoot-you" way) than whatever it is the OP is implying.
in the process you mentioned some of the most iconic female characters (outside perhaps of Princess Toadstool? ;)) in gaming history.
The Tifa/Aeris characters, and more importantly the death of Aeris, was something which influenced many gamers very strongly.
I'm a veteran gamer. I have absolutely no clue as to who Aeris is. Sorry.
I think it's from that dating sim with the huge swords and motorbikes made of chromium women.
They did say the sound was muted, actually.
I think that the 'stolen' that they're referring to is that a work being out of copyright doesn't mean you can claim ownership or creation of it.
The vulcans were to blame for Mt St Helens?
Yes - maliciously interfering with the infrastructure of a sovereign nation is an act of war. Doing it surreptitiously through civilian channels makes it terrorism.
There's a place better than New Jersey? Do you know what it's called? Do they have a brochure or a pamphlet or something?
Just had a look on Google Maps - looks like your best bet would be Montreal; and you can drive there in a little under 8 hours.
I suspect this is related to some overall plan for adding value to the Chrome platform.
1: How can a judge force you to sign away your Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination to release this information? Just say no.
In this case, you've already done any incrimination when you made the statements - hiding them after the fact is not your constitutional right. Like a mobster doesn't have the right to not have a ledger he kept of his criminal undertakings used against him; just because it was hidden under the bed.
2: How is it so hard to argue that you have a reasonable expection of privacy in your comments rendering them inadmissible in court? After all, if they hadn't been private then the opposing lawyers wouldn't have needed court to force them to be revealed.
Continuing the above example, were the ledger in a safe that only he know the combination to; the 5th amendment may apply to forcing testimony of the safe's combination.
But if he used the ledger in front of the people that work for him; any of them can be asked if he kept a ledger, and if they say yes (there's a reasonable expectation that the safe's contents are related to the offence), the safe can just be cracked, and its contents used. If any of them know the combination, than can be required to provide it.
3: People lie in Facebook. Wow, that's news. People lie in real life too. It's all about keeping up appearances. Why isn't the case being made that what I said on FB was all lies intended towards keeping up appearances among my friends? Pictures? Yeah I can smile through the pain for a 1/60th of a second - so what?
People lie in financial accounts too - that's why it's called evidence, not facts. It's not taken completely in absence of context, nor as 100% reliable or tamper-safe; but the likelihood of your own account of your behaviour being accurate is generally high.
"Oh noes! When I make a statement on record it can be subpoenaed as evidence against me when I lie about it!"
This is not by any means new, or specific to Facebook. If you're planning to deceive somebody about something that could go to court, keep your records consistently on the message you're trying to pass off.
Obviously you're not required to - you also have the option of leaving it in your bag, locker, or home.
I was thinking something a lot easier, and more convenient for a bunch of examinees - like the peer-to-peer Wi-Fi or Bluetooth on their phones.
Cell Jammers are normally illegal.
A far better idea is to make a test center room that is a faraday cage. Now you are blocking everything, not just cell phones.
Everything outside of the room - it wouldn't stop (or detect, as in this case) cheating between examinees.
At our exams, it was always clearly explained in the handbook, in the starting announcements, and on the cover page of the top sheet on each desk's papers that phones and electronic devices are to be on the desk, screen up, and turned off; and that if you're found to be violating that rule it will be considered as evidence of 'possible cheating, or attempting to do so'.
It'd be difficult to misinterpret that.
Do any relevant institutions /not/ have similar rules and procedures?
Seems the cache link you provided has unfortunately also been updated. There's still the tell-tale 'leather case' tag on it, but that seems to be the only remaining reference.
TFA deleted. Seems to still have the old tags though...
Undercover police are allowed to say they aren't cops. That's kind of the whole point.
Entrapment laws are to protect people from going to jail for something they wouldn't have done if they weren't asked to; not for something they wouldn't have done if they didn't think they could get away with it.
Found a clean copy of the text; have restored the embedded links here:
From the second paragraph of that article:
This deeply saddens n3td3v because
we believe that MPAA and RIAA are forces of good. They saved millions of lives.
(n3td3v has lobbied for corporal punishment for trolls and torrent downloaders)
http://it.toolbox.com/blogs/managing-infosec/security-trolls-n3td3v-12460 states:
N3td3v is/was a security troll that plagued the full disclosure list for quite a while, claiming to be a yahoo security engineer
(from the start of an extensive article)
The most complete copy I've found of Faulkner's lengthy initial posting on the matter is at:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:WnAbrdQbA30J:www.scribd.com/doc/13974347/mirror-of-wwwuwwwbcom-FBI-indiscriminate-actions-in-fascist-america+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk
Yep, the google cache of a page printed to PDF and uploaded to Scribd. Some formatting is lost; try the text-only version from the google cache toolbar and copying into an editor (or otherwise removing the bright-green-ness of the text).
This is probably the most complete account of events, tied together with at least one side of the full story.
The debt in the millions was the operating costs of a failed business he was part owner of (not in itself illegal, unless you incur the debt deliberately); and he was not the cause of the business failing (in his own words). I didn't find any evidence of him being charged with wrongdoing over the operation of that business (brief google search)
He wasn't hiding overseas - he was never told to stay in the country, and informed the head of the FBIs investigation where he would be living, and who he would be working for. He never tried to change his identity.
Faulkner, who was a part owner of Premier Voice before selling it about a year ago, acknowledges that Premier owed money to AT&T at one time — though he says he’s not certain it was for interconnection. He says that debt was assumed by the new owner when he sold the company. Either way, he says, this would be categorized as corporate debt, not fraud.
"There’s a big difference between stealing money and owing money," he says.
- http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/04/data-centers-ra/
Egh, that's it from me for now - some terrible bug in Chrome and/or Slashcode is making it a significant hassle to copy/paste stuff. Anyone else have similar issues? (I'm running current Chrome on OS X 10.6)
Any consumer network hardware you've picked up in the last decade or more will likely auto-sense using the incorrect pair and effectively add the required crossover; and only one device of the pair needs to support this.
This is so common, reliable (and useful) that it was added to the standard for gigabit.