After doing some security work at events, there's some easy tips on what todo/not todo.
1) have some good lucking women with you. Chances are you'll have a guard somewhere that can be distracted by cleavage.
2) if there's 2+ of people trying to blag their way in, A) only let 1 person talk B) if you're both talking, have the same script "My boyfriend went to the room to get the tickets and they were gone" from the girl, as the guy's saying "I left the tickets in the car, I think the valet took them" WILL get you turned away.
3) turn up when there's a line, before the event starts of course, but not too early, if you make a scene, it might be easier to just let you in.
4) if you get turned away by one guard, ask who you need to see to sort this out, go to them, be nice, wave back at the first person who sent you over, if they wave, say 'he took the ticket and said it was ok'
5) never say 'do you know who I am', and if you do, don't claim to be the person stood behind the guard. (that cracked me up)
6) if there's a list with names on, you might be able to peek and claim a name.
7) "where'd you get this obviously fake ticket?" "there's a guy in the foyer selling them, he said it was legit" "it's not, you need to see that person and get your money back" "but I have a ticket!" "it's fake" "but it's for this event" "yeah, no." is the wrong way. Playing the sob story that this was what you bought online, give as much info as you can. If an event has 5k tickets printed, it's not unknown for the printer/promoter to not only keep some tix behind, but to run dupes. This isn't the punters fault, dropping hints that the promoter/printer is dodgy is all too believable and may help you get in if they think you've done the right thing, not got a cheap tix from a dodgy guy out front.
for an event that's 'no re-admittance', the old 'I have explosive poop' will get you out, but might not get you back in, still, worth a try.
I get how social engineering works. Work a door for a few nights, manage an event, you'll hear all sorts of things and very quickly learn what'll never work, what/might/ work.
Yeah, that's what I'm reading from this, though as said elsewhere, this is some claims in the patents were invalidated, but I'm wondering then can Moto re-apply with more detail? But yeah, does this mean anyone without a full listing of the algorithm (which is most 'with a computer/on the internet' patent these days) has a chance to have parts made invalid?
Can of Worms.
Though the line from that article;
"On the flip side, Robart said that Microsoft has provided substantial evidence from technical journals and dictionaries to prove, for instance, that some of Motorola's technologies amount to general purpose devices that are indistinguishable from the general purpose computer."
Are interesting, as if that was applied fairly to everything, then most of the other Patent lawsuits going on atm would be thrown out too.
This is all crazy, really seems to be random on what Judge you get on if you're going to win/lose the case as they all interpret things so differently (at least it appears that way to me). Do they come into the court room with their mind made up before hand?
If a Judge (not a Jury) can invalidate Patent claims (are they THAT skilled in the science of these things?) then what the heck's the Patent Office for?
Is there any point in lodging a complaint to the Patent Office, when a Judge appears to be able to do it quicker, and knows the parties involved?
So in future, don't waste time with going the usual route, just get a Judge to decide on complex matters, and then the Patent Office, now with more time on it's hands, can start ruling in criminal trials.
What a mess.
Great, now we're going to get 'Yandexerised' adverts in Russian to go with the 'Scroogled' ads we see.
More than anything, it shows that the first product Microsoft needs to fix, is their spell checker.
Not a major problem, they'll just keep throwing money at it till their competitors get bored/they patent how the other search engines work and sue them to shut them down/give users an option to use any search engine, but with a huge 'are you sure?' Clippy until you go back to Bing.
iOS is a single target, get one sploit that works, you know it'll work on all of them.
The recent exnyos sploit only worked on some Samsung chips.
So.. hackers have more devices to attempt to hack!
Though all this is a waste of time if people use non-standard app stores and/or download warez, then what do they really expect?
Aye, some resin that I'm not sure will actually work. Will leave that to the Structural Engineer to slap some sense as needed.
Pre-fab does seem to be the way to go, but I can envision something where first the slap is poured, rails added at the side, and a truck drops on the makerbot.
Hoses for concrete are connected up, and concrete deliveries scheduled. The makebot uses forms to prep areas, more robotic assembly like a car than what we're seeing as 3d printing, and the concrete is poured (or forced under pressure) into these forms.
Pre-fabbed windows/plumbed units are bolted into position using the bots, with the forms wrapped around, and more concrete placed.
Couple of days later, the forms are removed, excess pour cleaned up. 30 days later, the bot lowers the struts on the roof, and attaches.
Most of the construction/can/ be automated, but to stop costly time consuming problems, there'll be an operator/general contractor still on site to A) make sure everything looks good, B) the concrete/pre-fab deliveries are on time C) safety to look over each other's backs, just in case.
Something that did use a lot of manpower on site will be drastically reduced, with the correct placement of builder rails on site, the 'bot' can be working on the next house as the concrete cures for the last one. Good operator/just in time deliveries should be able to handle a house on the production line a day, with the weather proof stage being hit 40 days after first pour (after slab).
And don't forget the other side of the equation; offer servers reasonably priced 100Gb local Google data center / site interconnects to keep the on-net customers interested and happy.
That's a HUGE income for Google. All those subscribers with high speed connections and no-one able to really hammer it? Most people using Amazon's cloud servers could jump to Google for faster speeds perhaps? Google makes money both ends of the equation.
Once it's there, it'd be hard to then cap it. I think they WANT you to use it as much as possible, HD+ films from Google Play, Hangouts in hidef. For them to rollout these speeds then stop you using it doesn't sound smart, and so far, Google's shown itself to be smart.
Yeah, as awesome as all this sounds, having Google provide the client (android/chromeOS/GoogleTV), the routers (Moto Mobility), the cable (Google Fiber), backend (DNS), services (Gmail, Play), money (Google Wallet), heck, drive to the nearest shop in a Google Car eventually? It could be scary.
Which is pure genius on Google's part, who would be the best provider of cloud servers than Google? By providing ludicrous speeds to consumers, they're also upping the ante for expectations of service that they either offer themselves or sell that improved service to others.
Google really are on the ball with this, making money at every point.
Oh and from the article "Google has $45 billion in cash on hand. So, if it really wanted to build out a cable company, it would need to take out a loan." And I'm sure Goldman Sachs could help them with that!
The '140 billion' value is coming from Goldman Sachs remember, a company that invested in companies deploying fiber years ago to prep for this moment, could it be that they're highballing the figure to get a better valuation for their money?
If it's that much, Google will deploy it themselves by buying the company that makes the fiber, installs it, creates the routers (oh... Moto Mobility...), and generally run everything at breakeven/loss to make the cash at the point it wants to.
140 billion isn't the amount Google actually needs to spend to implement this.
I'm incredibly curious to know how much Apple accepted from HTC though. It really would put a spin on the 'these are priceless' aspect they said (lied?) in court about.
Apple started strong here, but they're actions continue to hoist themselves. This deal should have been done after the Samsung case was settled. Guess left hand doesn't realise what right hand is doing.
Also, it's annoying WE don't get to see this. Judge Koh at first said she was going to run a transparent court, probably expecting it to hurt Samsung more, but now Apple's in a world of hurt, everything's being hidden away from the public. Not impressed with her bias.
That's it exactly. Considering how truly brutal this has been so far, I fully expect the Samsung lawyers to go in hard on the 'lying to the court on the value of the patents' aspect of it.
It's not just that they were willing to put some value, but the actual amount. Apple valued it at 20-30 bucks in the court, if it also turns out that it was a few cents, that brings the billion dollar settlement down to 'oh, is that all? here, let me rummage in my pocket for some loose change' territory (at least in Samsung scale).
I'm sure that the Judge Koh will let them roll over this as usual, but the appeal is going to be hilarious.
Slashdot Mirror
After doing some security work at events, there's some easy tips on what todo/not todo.
/might/ work.
1) have some good lucking women with you. Chances are you'll have a guard somewhere that can be distracted by cleavage.
2) if there's 2+ of people trying to blag their way in, A) only let 1 person talk B) if you're both talking, have the same script "My boyfriend went to the room to get the tickets and they were gone" from the girl, as the guy's saying "I left the tickets in the car, I think the valet took them" WILL get you turned away.
3) turn up when there's a line, before the event starts of course, but not too early, if you make a scene, it might be easier to just let you in.
4) if you get turned away by one guard, ask who you need to see to sort this out, go to them, be nice, wave back at the first person who sent you over, if they wave, say 'he took the ticket and said it was ok'
5) never say 'do you know who I am', and if you do, don't claim to be the person stood behind the guard. (that cracked me up)
6) if there's a list with names on, you might be able to peek and claim a name.
7) "where'd you get this obviously fake ticket?" "there's a guy in the foyer selling them, he said it was legit" "it's not, you need to see that person and get your money back" "but I have a ticket!" "it's fake" "but it's for this event" "yeah, no." is the wrong way. Playing the sob story that this was what you bought online, give as much info as you can. If an event has 5k tickets printed, it's not unknown for the printer/promoter to not only keep some tix behind, but to run dupes. This isn't the punters fault, dropping hints that the promoter/printer is dodgy is all too believable and may help you get in if they think you've done the right thing, not got a cheap tix from a dodgy guy out front.
for an event that's 'no re-admittance', the old 'I have explosive poop' will get you out, but might not get you back in, still, worth a try.
I get how social engineering works. Work a door for a few nights, manage an event, you'll hear all sorts of things and very quickly learn what'll never work, what
Yeah, that's what I'm reading from this, though as said elsewhere, this is some claims in the patents were invalidated, but I'm wondering then can Moto re-apply with more detail? But yeah, does this mean anyone without a full listing of the algorithm (which is most 'with a computer/on the internet' patent these days) has a chance to have parts made invalid? Can of Worms.
Thank you, this bit keeps getting skimmed over.
Though the line from that article; "On the flip side, Robart said that Microsoft has provided substantial evidence from technical journals and dictionaries to prove, for instance, that some of Motorola's technologies amount to general purpose devices that are indistinguishable from the general purpose computer." Are interesting, as if that was applied fairly to everything, then most of the other Patent lawsuits going on atm would be thrown out too. This is all crazy, really seems to be random on what Judge you get on if you're going to win/lose the case as they all interpret things so differently (at least it appears that way to me). Do they come into the court room with their mind made up before hand?
If a Judge (not a Jury) can invalidate Patent claims (are they THAT skilled in the science of these things?) then what the heck's the Patent Office for?
Is there any point in lodging a complaint to the Patent Office, when a Judge appears to be able to do it quicker, and knows the parties involved?
So in future, don't waste time with going the usual route, just get a Judge to decide on complex matters, and then the Patent Office, now with more time on it's hands, can start ruling in criminal trials.
What a mess.
Great, now we're going to get 'Yandexerised' adverts in Russian to go with the 'Scroogled' ads we see. More than anything, it shows that the first product Microsoft needs to fix, is their spell checker. Not a major problem, they'll just keep throwing money at it till their competitors get bored/they patent how the other search engines work and sue them to shut them down/give users an option to use any search engine, but with a huge 'are you sure?' Clippy until you go back to Bing.
iOS is a single target, get one sploit that works, you know it'll work on all of them. The recent exnyos sploit only worked on some Samsung chips. So.. hackers have more devices to attempt to hack! Though all this is a waste of time if people use non-standard app stores and/or download warez, then what do they really expect?
Aye, some resin that I'm not sure will actually work. Will leave that to the Structural Engineer to slap some sense as needed. Pre-fab does seem to be the way to go, but I can envision something where first the slap is poured, rails added at the side, and a truck drops on the makerbot. Hoses for concrete are connected up, and concrete deliveries scheduled. The makebot uses forms to prep areas, more robotic assembly like a car than what we're seeing as 3d printing, and the concrete is poured (or forced under pressure) into these forms. Pre-fabbed windows/plumbed units are bolted into position using the bots, with the forms wrapped around, and more concrete placed. Couple of days later, the forms are removed, excess pour cleaned up. 30 days later, the bot lowers the struts on the roof, and attaches. Most of the construction /can/ be automated, but to stop costly time consuming problems, there'll be an operator/general contractor still on site to A) make sure everything looks good, B) the concrete/pre-fab deliveries are on time C) safety to look over each other's backs, just in case.
Something that did use a lot of manpower on site will be drastically reduced, with the correct placement of builder rails on site, the 'bot' can be working on the next house as the concrete cures for the last one. Good operator/just in time deliveries should be able to handle a house on the production line a day, with the weather proof stage being hit 40 days after first pour (after slab).
Yup, so MS have patented existing tech. I expect Tasker to be getting a notification about this any moment.
And it's also by a Goldman Sachs analyst who /might/ have an interest in valuing the cost as higher than it actually is.
yeah, both would seem to be sensible. Those numbers aren't used for anything else are they? So why not make them both activate the emergency services.
3
why can't we standardise on that?
And don't forget the other side of the equation; offer servers reasonably priced 100Gb local Google data center / site interconnects to keep the on-net customers interested and happy.
That's a HUGE income for Google. All those subscribers with high speed connections and no-one able to really hammer it? Most people using Amazon's cloud servers could jump to Google for faster speeds perhaps? Google makes money both ends of the equation.
Once it's there, it'd be hard to then cap it. I think they WANT you to use it as much as possible, HD+ films from Google Play, Hangouts in hidef. For them to rollout these speeds then stop you using it doesn't sound smart, and so far, Google's shown itself to be smart.
Trouble is, Goldman Sachs invested in a lot of those companies that laid out that dark fiber Google wants.
Other major source would be China.
Yeah, as awesome as all this sounds, having Google provide the client (android/chromeOS/GoogleTV), the routers (Moto Mobility), the cable (Google Fiber), backend (DNS), services (Gmail, Play), money (Google Wallet), heck, drive to the nearest shop in a Google Car eventually? It could be scary.
Hmm, wonder how it works out for distance/population density/regulations for Aus/US roll outs of this type of stuff.
Which is pure genius on Google's part, who would be the best provider of cloud servers than Google? By providing ludicrous speeds to consumers, they're also upping the ante for expectations of service that they either offer themselves or sell that improved service to others. Google really are on the ball with this, making money at every point.
Oh and from the article "Google has $45 billion in cash on hand. So, if it really wanted to build out a cable company, it would need to take out a loan." And I'm sure Goldman Sachs could help them with that!
The '140 billion' value is coming from Goldman Sachs remember, a company that invested in companies deploying fiber years ago to prep for this moment, could it be that they're highballing the figure to get a better valuation for their money? If it's that much, Google will deploy it themselves by buying the company that makes the fiber, installs it, creates the routers (oh... Moto Mobility...), and generally run everything at breakeven/loss to make the cash at the point it wants to. 140 billion isn't the amount Google actually needs to spend to implement this.
Could that BE anymore silly.
They'll ask for and get taxpayer funded bailouts, or there'll be some other way to get Google to pay somehow for it. It's a moneygrab.
I'm incredibly curious to know how much Apple accepted from HTC though. It really would put a spin on the 'these are priceless' aspect they said (lied?) in court about. Apple started strong here, but they're actions continue to hoist themselves. This deal should have been done after the Samsung case was settled. Guess left hand doesn't realise what right hand is doing. Also, it's annoying WE don't get to see this. Judge Koh at first said she was going to run a transparent court, probably expecting it to hurt Samsung more, but now Apple's in a world of hurt, everything's being hidden away from the public. Not impressed with her bias.
That's it exactly. Considering how truly brutal this has been so far, I fully expect the Samsung lawyers to go in hard on the 'lying to the court on the value of the patents' aspect of it. It's not just that they were willing to put some value, but the actual amount. Apple valued it at 20-30 bucks in the court, if it also turns out that it was a few cents, that brings the billion dollar settlement down to 'oh, is that all? here, let me rummage in my pocket for some loose change' territory (at least in Samsung scale). I'm sure that the Judge Koh will let them roll over this as usual, but the appeal is going to be hilarious.