People keep saying this but where's the proof? I haven't seen any evidence of such a policy. But I admittedly have only been partially following the case.
Childs reportedly had a fractious relationship with some of his coworkers, attorneys on both sides said. He testified at trial that he never intended to harm the network but said that other employees, including his supervisors, were not qualified to have the passwords.
Childs claimed he was merely following established industry guidelines for password protection.
"You do not ever give up your username and password," Childs said.
That doesn't sound like you make it sound. Industry guidelines are not the same as company/government policy.
To be honest I think the Slashdot community is wrong to defend this guy. He sounds like an ego-maniac driven not by security, but by the sys-admin God complex. However, that's just what I think, and I could be wrong. Sans the full transcript of the trial it's really hard to say what happened. I'd love for groklaw to take a look at it too. They probably need a break from SCO shenanigans.:)
Is Zune really considered a failure? Seems to do pretty well these days from what I have read. Xbox is surely moving into (if not already) a money making venture. Things like netflix integration are going to make them a boatload of cash.
The biggest mistake people seem to make is that they think there can only be room in a market for one competitor. I dont think a lot of these digital markets pan out like that.
You are correct in that the OS and Office divisions have always been their bread and butter though.
Yet here you are -- here we all are. And interestingly enough you are completely missing the point (or trolling). And perpetuating a stigmatized, misinformed stereotype.
Addiction does not just relate to substance abuse and chemical reactions from illicit drugs. Addiction is a state described by a set of behaviors and reactions (physical and mental) when faced with the loss of the stimulus. It has nothing to do with how much something will take to addict a particular person. That's fallacy logic.
ala wikipedia:
The medical community now makes a careful theoretical distinction between physical dependence (characterized by symptoms of withdrawal) and psychological dependence (or simply addiction).
The DSM definition of addiction can be boiled down to compulsive use of a substance (or engagement in an activity) despite ongoing negative consequences—this is also a summary of what used to be called "psychological dependency."
TFA basically states that they are seeing symptoms characteristic of CHEMICAL dependence too -- which is why this is unusual. If they actually were seeing symptoms of OCD, they would say they saw symptoms of OCD. Obsessive Compulsive Disorder is a completely different disease that only has partial symptom overlap with addiction. You should maybe consider reading up on it sometime as it probably afflicts someone you know (1 in 200 adults).
Headline provoked questions in your mind, you read on. I don't see the problem. Only thing a professional copy editor may have done is removed the word "a". Or, maybe something like NY Lawmakers vie for Space Shuttle.
Headlines are often supposed to leave a bit of mystery. Whether you like that or not is up to you, but it's unlikely to ever change as long as there are headlines.
Yeah, the slice shot part was a joke, and I was running fast and loose with the details; but wow it really whooshed over Slashdot.
Anyways, the way the officer was talking to him in the video gave me the impression the lot of them were being belligerent. The article mentioned one even left the scene. Clearly there is more going on there than can be seen in the video.
It sounds like the cops got caught pretty red handed but I'm having a hard time buying that this douchebag was just politely refusing to show ID. They hit some guy in the head with some kinda nerf ball, which probably is no big deal but then heckled him to the point where he called 911. Now, the Capitol Hill is an area of seattle know for a large Gay community and Gay bashing hate crimes are far from uncommon there. He was also apparently drunk. The whole lot of them sound pretty belligerent in the video. Article seems a bit biased.
Don't get me wrong, the cops should be made to answer for their actions here too, but let's be sure not to paint this guy as some Rosa Parks of drunken nerf golf. Besides, he sliced the shot.:)
Yeah, pro-Flash and anti-Apple people talk as though Flash is a stable and established standard component of any mobile platform, and has been for years.
This, ladies and gents, is the perfect example of a straw man.
While the rest of what you say is actually very spot on, I think you are forgetting that the implication here is that no one can package technology for anyone else to run on an iPhone. I could never create a library or SDK or what-have-you for you to include in your iphone binary if it has any hinf of interacting with another language at any statge.
Apple's controlling nature and hatred for Flash is causing significant collateral damage and sets a terrible precedent with regards to respect for developers.
Why is it a game a brinkmanship to create a tool to aid in creating native apps? You're logic makes sense up until you apply it to cross compiling native code. Why should I, as a developer, not get a tool to help me render animations?
Every time a Flash story comes out someone pushes this anecdote about cocoa but where's the evidence? You're complaining it took two years to rewrite Photoshop in a completely different language? How many times have you re-written something as complex as Photoshop in the past two years?
Here's another quote from the Photoshop Product manager (John Nack) in 2008:
No one has ever ported an application the size of Photoshop from Carbon to Cocoa (as I mentioned earlier, after 9 years as an Apple product Final Cut Pro remains Carbon-based), so we’re dealing with unknown territory.
...
1) Writers gin up controversy about Apple vs. Adobe, portraying this as a case of some tit-for-tat ("This one time, Steve wouldn't play golf with Shantanu, so Adobe is sulking!"). Oh, come on. This is why Lightroom x64 is a such a nice counterpoint: Adobe's decisions are pragmatic, not ideological. Look, Apple and Adobe share the goal of maximizing Photoshop performance on Mac hardware, and we're working together on all aspects of that story--64-bit included.
"If it bleeds, it leads," however, and writers looking to drive ad impressions will try to fabricate a grudge match. Please don't let them.
2) Adobe gets castigated for "dragging its feet" on Cocoa/x64. This charge will be inevitable, I suppose, but I want you to know that we started work on the problem immediately after WWDC '07. We started peeling senior engineers off the CS4 effort, and we'll keep pouring on the muscle in the next cycle. This work comes at the expense of other priorities, but so be it.
3) We start hearing all about "Cocoa Über Alles"--about how Adobe should have known that Cocoa is the One True Way and should have started the move years ago. Most Mac users don't know Cocoa from Ovaltine, and nor should they: it's just an implementation detail, not a measure of quality. I think Brent Simmons, creator of wonderful Cocoa apps like NetNewsWire, put it most elegantly: "Finder + Cocoa = Finder." That is, rewriting one's app in Cocoa doesn't somehow automatically improve its speed, usability, or feature set.
I'll also note that Apple's Carbon Web site says, "Carbon is a set of APIs for developing full-featured, high-performance, and reliable applications for Mac OS X... The Carbon APIs are also well-suited to cross-platform development." I don't mention it to detract from Cocoa; I mention it to point out that each approach has its pros and cons, and in hopes that we don't hear all about how Cocoa is clearly the only way to write "real" Mac software.
This whole cocoa vs carbon drama is stupid. It seems only to suffice as some PR dig from Apple fanboys against Adobe. Or some shit-stirring controversy for tech blogs to get hits or slashdotters to whore karma. Anyone who has used Adobe apps professionally on mac in the past ten years knows at no time were they ever not available on Macs.
Nobody screwed anybody. It's just what happens when platforms change.
Don't forget some of that $25 billion comes from doubleclick too. I'm not advocating for these types of ads by any means, but both types of ads work to some extent and there will likely always be room in the marketplace for unobtrusive ads, and intrusive ones.
It's not that they have no control, it's that they exercise no control (or QA/due diligence).
Most medium to large websites will have some clause in their contracts with media buyers/ad networks where they reserve the right to pull any ad, at any time, for any reason. The problem is often the traffic departments (more so for large websites, but this applies to smaller ones via the ad network they use).
Traffic departments are basically the office peons that cut and paste the HTML code from, say Doubleclick, into the publisher's website. These people are overworked, underpaid, and under-skilled. Almost none of them could program hello world in JavaScript and their HTML mostly consists of knowing that tags have a beginning and an end. The problem with all this is that these are the gatekeepers between malware ads and that ad showing up on a website.
Their idea of "QA" is to load an ad up in the ad serving software, look at it, click on it, and make sure it only loops/animates within the guidelines. But this is the cost of business. Having a JavaScript expert try and reverse engineer every ad tag that comes through would be impractical, and nearly impossible. Ad tags are made up of hundreds of lines of JavaScript code that is all obfuscated to help protect the ad serving companies "IP." (All variable names changed to random 2 letter names, no line breaks, functions that go nowhere, etc)
Slashdot Mirror
From: http://www.ktvu.com/news/23283217/detail.html (emphasis mine).
Childs reportedly had a fractious relationship with some of his coworkers, attorneys on both sides said. He testified at trial that he never intended to harm the network but said that other employees, including his supervisors, were not qualified to have the passwords. Childs claimed he was merely following established industry guidelines for password protection. "You do not ever give up your username and password," Childs said.
That doesn't sound like you make it sound. Industry guidelines are not the same as company/government policy.
:)
To be honest I think the Slashdot community is wrong to defend this guy. He sounds like an ego-maniac driven not by security, but by the sys-admin God complex. However, that's just what I think, and I could be wrong. Sans the full transcript of the trial it's really hard to say what happened. I'd love for groklaw to take a look at it too. They probably need a break from SCO shenanigans.
Who cares about security if you can remote print? Doesn't everyone consider printing to a location they aren't at a top priority?
I know when I need a document on paper, and I need it now, I print to somewhere else.
So 12 of the people suing them are still working there?
Awkward...
Apparently the off topic mod doesnt have a facebook account
Is Zune really considered a failure? Seems to do pretty well these days from what I have read. Xbox is surely moving into (if not already) a money making venture. Things like netflix integration are going to make them a boatload of cash.
The biggest mistake people seem to make is that they think there can only be room in a market for one competitor. I dont think a lot of these digital markets pan out like that.
You are correct in that the OS and Office divisions have always been their bread and butter though.
Addiction does not just relate to substance abuse and chemical reactions from illicit drugs. Addiction is a state described by a set of behaviors and reactions (physical and mental) when faced with the loss of the stimulus. It has nothing to do with how much something will take to addict a particular person. That's fallacy logic.
ala wikipedia:
The medical community now makes a careful theoretical distinction between physical dependence (characterized by symptoms of withdrawal) and psychological dependence (or simply addiction). The DSM definition of addiction can be boiled down to compulsive use of a substance (or engagement in an activity) despite ongoing negative consequences—this is also a summary of what used to be called "psychological dependency."
TFA basically states that they are seeing symptoms characteristic of CHEMICAL dependence too -- which is why this is unusual. If they actually were seeing symptoms of OCD, they would say they saw symptoms of OCD. Obsessive Compulsive Disorder is a completely different disease that only has partial symptom overlap with addiction. You should maybe consider reading up on it sometime as it probably afflicts someone you know (1 in 200 adults).
Headline provoked questions in your mind, you read on. I don't see the problem. Only thing a professional copy editor may have done is removed the word "a". Or, maybe something like NY Lawmakers vie for Space Shuttle.
Headlines are often supposed to leave a bit of mystery. Whether you like that or not is up to you, but it's unlikely to ever change as long as there are headlines.
Yeah, the slice shot part was a joke, and I was running fast and loose with the details; but wow it really whooshed over Slashdot.
Anyways, the way the officer was talking to him in the video gave me the impression the lot of them were being belligerent. The article mentioned one even left the scene. Clearly there is more going on there than can be seen in the video.
Sorry, but you're doing it wrong.
Isn't consorting with people who slice their golf shots also a crime? Conspiracy to commit double bogey or something?
It sounds like the cops got caught pretty red handed but I'm having a hard time buying that this douchebag was just politely refusing to show ID. They hit some guy in the head with some kinda nerf ball, which probably is no big deal but then heckled him to the point where he called 911. Now, the Capitol Hill is an area of seattle know for a large Gay community and Gay bashing hate crimes are far from uncommon there. He was also apparently drunk. The whole lot of them sound pretty belligerent in the video. Article seems a bit biased.
:)
Don't get me wrong, the cops should be made to answer for their actions here too, but let's be sure not to paint this guy as some Rosa Parks of drunken nerf golf. Besides, he sliced the shot.
What are you talking about? I haven't read the summary or article.
Looks like they actually are looking at possible criminal charges. The sad part? It's the second time that company would have been prosecuted.
Source: ABC News
Apparently there also needs to be a 'golfclap' button.
Yeah, pro-Flash and anti-Apple people talk as though Flash is a stable and established standard component of any mobile platform, and has been for years.
This, ladies and gents, is the perfect example of a straw man.
While the rest of what you say is actually very spot on, I think you are forgetting that the implication here is that no one can package technology for anyone else to run on an iPhone. I could never create a library or SDK or what-have-you for you to include in your iphone binary if it has any hinf of interacting with another language at any statge.
Apple's controlling nature and hatred for Flash is causing significant collateral damage and sets a terrible precedent with regards to respect for developers.
Why is it a game a brinkmanship to create a tool to aid in creating native apps? You're logic makes sense up until you apply it to cross compiling native code. Why should I, as a developer, not get a tool to help me render animations?
Btw here's what one of the photoshop engineers said about the switch to intel based Macs: http://blogs.adobe.com/scottbyer/2006/03/macintosh_and_t.html
Here's another quote from the Photoshop Product manager (John Nack) in 2008:
No one has ever ported an application the size of Photoshop from Carbon to Cocoa (as I mentioned earlier, after 9 years as an Apple product Final Cut Pro remains Carbon-based), so we’re dealing with unknown territory.
...
1) Writers gin up controversy about Apple vs. Adobe, portraying this as a case of some tit-for-tat ("This one time, Steve wouldn't play golf with Shantanu, so Adobe is sulking!"). Oh, come on. This is why Lightroom x64 is a such a nice counterpoint: Adobe's decisions are pragmatic, not ideological. Look, Apple and Adobe share the goal of maximizing Photoshop performance on Mac hardware, and we're working together on all aspects of that story--64-bit included.
"If it bleeds, it leads," however, and writers looking to drive ad impressions will try to fabricate a grudge match. Please don't let them.
2) Adobe gets castigated for "dragging its feet" on Cocoa/x64. This charge will be inevitable, I suppose, but I want you to know that we started work on the problem immediately after WWDC '07. We started peeling senior engineers off the CS4 effort, and we'll keep pouring on the muscle in the next cycle. This work comes at the expense of other priorities, but so be it.
3) We start hearing all about "Cocoa Über Alles"--about how Adobe should have known that Cocoa is the One True Way and should have started the move years ago. Most Mac users don't know Cocoa from Ovaltine, and nor should they: it's just an implementation detail, not a measure of quality. I think Brent Simmons, creator of wonderful Cocoa apps like NetNewsWire, put it most elegantly: "Finder + Cocoa = Finder." That is, rewriting one's app in Cocoa doesn't somehow automatically improve its speed, usability, or feature set.
I'll also note that Apple's Carbon Web site says, "Carbon is a set of APIs for developing full-featured, high-performance, and reliable applications for Mac OS X... The Carbon APIs are also well-suited to cross-platform development." I don't mention it to detract from Cocoa; I mention it to point out that each approach has its pros and cons, and in hopes that we don't hear all about how Cocoa is clearly the only way to write "real" Mac software.
Read more here: http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2008/04/photoshop_lr_64.html
This whole cocoa vs carbon drama is stupid. It seems only to suffice as some PR dig from Apple fanboys against Adobe. Or some shit-stirring controversy for tech blogs to get hits or slashdotters to whore karma. Anyone who has used Adobe apps professionally on mac in the past ten years knows at no time were they ever not available on Macs.
Nobody screwed anybody. It's just what happens when platforms change.
A good loony toons MMO would be sweet actually. Think of all the PVP with acme anvils and pianos.
Looks like he censored "heel" actually. Not even the dirtiest part of a foot.
Canvas tag. Get ready, because it's coming. And you better believe some publishers are going to integrate content. Block the tag? no content for you.
Sadly Slashdot is so blinded by Flash hate (some deserved, some not) that this gets little discussion.
There is a concept in advertising called "top of mind."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_of_mind_awareness
Don't forget some of that $25 billion comes from doubleclick too. I'm not advocating for these types of ads by any means, but both types of ads work to some extent and there will likely always be room in the marketplace for unobtrusive ads, and intrusive ones.
It's not that they have no control, it's that they exercise no control (or QA/due diligence).
Most medium to large websites will have some clause in their contracts with media buyers/ad networks where they reserve the right to pull any ad, at any time, for any reason. The problem is often the traffic departments (more so for large websites, but this applies to smaller ones via the ad network they use).
Traffic departments are basically the office peons that cut and paste the HTML code from, say Doubleclick, into the publisher's website. These people are overworked, underpaid, and under-skilled. Almost none of them could program hello world in JavaScript and their HTML mostly consists of knowing that tags have a beginning and an end. The problem with all this is that these are the gatekeepers between malware ads and that ad showing up on a website.
Their idea of "QA" is to load an ad up in the ad serving software, look at it, click on it, and make sure it only loops/animates within the guidelines. But this is the cost of business. Having a JavaScript expert try and reverse engineer every ad tag that comes through would be impractical, and nearly impossible. Ad tags are made up of hundreds of lines of JavaScript code that is all obfuscated to help protect the ad serving companies "IP." (All variable names changed to random 2 letter names, no line breaks, functions that go nowhere, etc)
I personally just block JavaScript by default. You don't need Flash to have a vector to exploit or to make an ad that slows down someone's computer.
the Zero Punctuation videos are hilarious
Apple is pretty open with the iPad/iPhone
wat