Lying under oath already is a crime - it's called perjury. However, trying someone for perjury requires that you prove your case "beyond reasonable doubt".
If a man claims not to have $2 million (and we assume that if he does he isn't stupid enough to hold it in bank accounts that can be easily traced to him), how on Earth do you prove he's lying "beyond reasonable doubt"?
A lot of photographers are very awkward with that kind of thing because they make a significant amount of money from people coming to them later for reprints.
I think some of it is cultural - when I got married there were plenty of photographers in Ireland prepared to release the rights to the photos to me for reprinting, but in the UK that's very rare.
Specifically, it was a very high tax at a time of economic downturn. Combined with a law which effectively forced America to rely on currency from the UK because they weren't allowed to produce their own. The downturn in London led to many US businesses having their debts called in, thus facing ruin.
Of course, in those days there wouldn't have been a great deal in the way of unemployment benefit. Your options would have been starve or rely on charity (and of course there was no Oxfam back then, local charities can only help so much...)
Looks like I may have been wrong about people being able to feed their families.
They have to get a hell of a lot more oppressive than any western government is right now.
Think "entire families disappearing in the night" oppressive. Now, what with the "extraordinary renditions" (read: state-sponsored kidnapping), the tools are in place for that oppression but they need to be used a hell of a lot more before many people will say that this is too much.
but the UK ICO has only once taken serious action that I'm aware of and it's had the power to do so for 10 years or more.
Let's see, under UK law:
You mustn't send personal data outside the EU without the user's consent unless processes are in place to ensure that UK data protection law is still followed. All well and good for Facebook itself, but what about applications?
You mustn't keep personal data any longer than what you need it for. Yet facebook openly admit that they don't actually delete accounts even when they're asked to.
And Facebook has offices in London. So yes, they are subject to this law.
Visa deal with more or less every currency in the world. My guess would be they store the value of the transaction in the lowest common denominator of that currency and a separate field tells them what the currency is.
Not all countries have a currency where 5 of the major unit would buy you a burger.
I'd add to that that (historically at least, haven't checked recently) if you follow the terms of the license, companies aren't allowed to use an OEM copy of Windows as the basis for a network-wide clean install - even if they only plan to install it on PCs that shipped with an appropriate license.
Hence the continued popularity of licensing Windows through Volume Licensing even when you're buying PCs with Windows preinstalled. Having spent some time wrestling with the copy of Windows installed by the OEM, I can confidently say that Windows XP is a far better product before Dell, HP et al's system builders get their hands on it.
Now, I can't sign a new Volume Licensing agreement for Windows XP. I have to buy Vista and exercise the downgrade right. But the downgrade right doesn't go all the way back to NT 3.51 by any means. The downgrade rights I have will remain OK as long as the licensing agreement is in place but they only last 3 years - after that I either buy outright (no further upgrades, if the company expands in the future I can't get another volume license for just the expansion because the license states "you cover every PC in your organisation or you cover none at all") or sign up to a new agreement. Which may well have totally different downgrade rights.
Most places I've worked (large and small), 3-5 years "refresh" doesn't mean "everyone automatically gets a new machine after 3-5 years whether they need it or not". It means "If someone's PC packs up after 3-5 years for whatever reason, we won't dedicate any time to fixing it".
Everywhere I've ever worked has taken the approach "let's give the new version time for the bugs to be shaken out. Then we'll see how they get on and make a decision". This was the case in the days of Win2K, Windows XP and Vista.
Vista broke a lot of things while bringing nothing particularly beneficial (at least for a business) to the table. Anyone who hadn't already paid for it through something like Software Assurance was therefore very likely to say "No thanks".
18 months from now, however, USB3 will start to become more widespread and I bet we won't see USB3 support in XP. Frankly, that's about the only thing I can think of that Windows 7 might be able to offer. And seeing as USB took years to get from "what's that funny rectangular socket on the back?" to mainstream, I'm not holding my breath.
The FSM had the idea of imaging and lo! it was good.
And so He did lower His noodly appendage and create Ghost, Acronis TrueImage, dd and g4u. And He saw these applications and He was pleased. For they were good, and they prevented much Wailing and Gnashing of Teeth.
PHP, IMO, is an absolute nightmare for a hosting company. Particularly if you have a lot of customers who have been with you for years using the same shitty web apps as they did when they first signed up.
The main problem is that the developers of PHP only started paying any attention to security relatively late on in the development of the language. They've added all sorts of things to make PHP more secure, but quite often they have to be specifically enabled and will break some code.
OK if you've got a relatively well managed corporate site with a single team dealing with any PHP applications. What if you've got a few thousand customers, many of whom don't actually know the first thing about their site because they paid someone else to set it up three years ago?
OTOH, what sort of hosting company is going to turn around and say "Sorry, we don't offer PHP"?
What's amazing to me is the loyalty to Microsoft being displayed in the vast majority of posts so far. It seems that people somehow don't remember all the headaches the Outlook+Exchange combo have caused users and admins over the past eight or nine years. Heck, wasn't it just last year that the silly "sorry, we don't know how to program correctly for daylight savings - so all your appointments for the next few weeks will be off by an hour" bug bit so many people?
They still don't know how to deal with daylight savings. Appointments in Outlook/Exchange are sent under the hood in UTC and at the point it's put on the end-users calendar, the appropriate offset is added to account for the timezone they're in. Once it's on their calendar, it doesn't move.
What if the end-user is in a different timezone this week and has changed the timezone on their PC accordingly? What happens to calendar appointments they receive?
What happens if you are sending a recurring appointment and one of the people involved is based in a timezone which doesn't move to DST at the same time as the others? That doesn't work either.
All of the things you're describing as locking these people into Outlook sound like things that could better be handled *outside* of Outlook.
They're probably integrated with Outlook because the problem they solve is fundamentally 70% communication, 30% organising that communication in some fashion. Their plugin provides the 30% organising, Outlook provides the communication.
I could equally ask - why the Hell do so few PDAs and smartphones support IMAP NOTIFY? It gives you push email using a perfectly good standard that works quite happily with any half-decent IMAP server. Concept-wise, it's not drastically different to ActiveSync (client establishes a TCP/IP connection with the server, says "let me know when something new comes in" and keeps the connection open).
I have yet to see an Outlook sync plugin that was worth a damn and I've looked at plugins for Zimbra, OpenExchange, Citadel and generic IMAP servers.
Most of the time, they don't integrate properly at all. "Shared" calendars aren't (or they sync on-demand rather than in realtime, which defeats the whole object of shared calendars because it introduces one race condition for every user on the system), email rules aren't synced (which means that things like out of office don't work), the concept of mailbox ACLs simply doesn't exist.
All of these remain problems with the sync plugin even when the system they're syncing with supports all of these things properly.
Google may (may) have done it right but frankly I doubt it.
Personally, I dont get this, because while Exchange used to be a nightmare, it is far from that now. In fact, its pretty simple if things are done right from the beginning, and servers are properly maintained.
You would be amazed how many alleged sysadmins couldn't admin their way out of a paper bag. You would be sad at the number of businesses that take the approach "it's not our staff that's the problem, Exchange is such a horror to manage that you need someone who can dedicate their entire life to it".
Perhaps it's because admitting it's your staff that are the problem means admitting that you made a bad hiring decision.
All this droning on about training but I've never seen a company offer any training on anything other than custom applications that are specific to the organisation. Windows and Office training may have happened years ago when computers were new but today...
Slashdot Mirror
Lying under oath already is a crime - it's called perjury. However, trying someone for perjury requires that you prove your case "beyond reasonable doubt".
If a man claims not to have $2 million (and we assume that if he does he isn't stupid enough to hold it in bank accounts that can be easily traced to him), how on Earth do you prove he's lying "beyond reasonable doubt"?
A lot of photographers are very awkward with that kind of thing because they make a significant amount of money from people coming to them later for reprints.
I think some of it is cultural - when I got married there were plenty of photographers in Ireland prepared to release the rights to the photos to me for reprinting, but in the UK that's very rare.
Specifically, it was a very high tax at a time of economic downturn. Combined with a law which effectively forced America to rely on currency from the UK because they weren't allowed to produce their own. The downturn in London led to many US businesses having their debts called in, thus facing ruin.
Of course, in those days there wouldn't have been a great deal in the way of unemployment benefit. Your options would have been starve or rely on charity (and of course there was no Oxfam back then, local charities can only help so much...)
Looks like I may have been wrong about people being able to feed their families.
Who's talking about the American revolution? It's probably the only one in history that wasn't prompted by people being unable to feed their families.
Would that be like how the good people of Iraq revolted against Saddam Hussein?
He can make a complaint to the Independent Police Complaints Commission. A department so independent it's run by a bunch of policemen.
They have to get a hell of a lot more oppressive than any western government is right now.
Think "entire families disappearing in the night" oppressive. Now, what with the "extraordinary renditions" (read: state-sponsored kidnapping), the tools are in place for that oppression but they need to be used a hell of a lot more before many people will say that this is too much.
but the UK ICO has only once taken serious action that I'm aware of and it's had the power to do so for 10 years or more.
Let's see, under UK law:
And Facebook has offices in London. So yes, they are subject to this law.
Visa deal with more or less every currency in the world. My guess would be they store the value of the transaction in the lowest common denominator of that currency and a separate field tells them what the currency is.
Not all countries have a currency where 5 of the major unit would buy you a burger.
I bet if you received a comparable amount of paper junk mail you'd soon change your mind.
Yep.
Interesting point.
I'd add to that that (historically at least, haven't checked recently) if you follow the terms of the license, companies aren't allowed to use an OEM copy of Windows as the basis for a network-wide clean install - even if they only plan to install it on PCs that shipped with an appropriate license.
Hence the continued popularity of licensing Windows through Volume Licensing even when you're buying PCs with Windows preinstalled. Having spent some time wrestling with the copy of Windows installed by the OEM, I can confidently say that Windows XP is a far better product before Dell, HP et al's system builders get their hands on it.
Now, I can't sign a new Volume Licensing agreement for Windows XP. I have to buy Vista and exercise the downgrade right. But the downgrade right doesn't go all the way back to NT 3.51 by any means. The downgrade rights I have will remain OK as long as the licensing agreement is in place but they only last 3 years - after that I either buy outright (no further upgrades, if the company expands in the future I can't get another volume license for just the expansion because the license states "you cover every PC in your organisation or you cover none at all") or sign up to a new agreement. Which may well have totally different downgrade rights.
Depends very much on the company.
Most places I've worked (large and small), 3-5 years "refresh" doesn't mean "everyone automatically gets a new machine after 3-5 years whether they need it or not". It means "If someone's PC packs up after 3-5 years for whatever reason, we won't dedicate any time to fixing it".
Yep, that's the one ;)
Everywhere I've ever worked has taken the approach "let's give the new version time for the bugs to be shaken out. Then we'll see how they get on and make a decision". This was the case in the days of Win2K, Windows XP and Vista.
Vista broke a lot of things while bringing nothing particularly beneficial (at least for a business) to the table. Anyone who hadn't already paid for it through something like Software Assurance was therefore very likely to say "No thanks".
18 months from now, however, USB3 will start to become more widespread and I bet we won't see USB3 support in XP. Frankly, that's about the only thing I can think of that Windows 7 might be able to offer. And seeing as USB took years to get from "what's that funny rectangular socket on the back?" to mainstream, I'm not holding my breath.
I doubt it. If you did that, you'd wind up with an animal with an amazing sense of smell but also a tendency to get distracted by expensive suits.
The FSM had the idea of imaging and lo! it was good.
And so He did lower His noodly appendage and create Ghost, Acronis TrueImage, dd and g4u. And He saw these applications and He was pleased. For they were good, and they prevented much Wailing and Gnashing of Teeth.
PHP, IMO, is an absolute nightmare for a hosting company. Particularly if you have a lot of customers who have been with you for years using the same shitty web apps as they did when they first signed up.
The main problem is that the developers of PHP only started paying any attention to security relatively late on in the development of the language. They've added all sorts of things to make PHP more secure, but quite often they have to be specifically enabled and will break some code.
OK if you've got a relatively well managed corporate site with a single team dealing with any PHP applications. What if you've got a few thousand customers, many of whom don't actually know the first thing about their site because they paid someone else to set it up three years ago?
OTOH, what sort of hosting company is going to turn around and say "Sorry, we don't offer PHP"?
Hosting companies can install something like rssh
What's amazing to me is the loyalty to Microsoft being displayed in the vast majority of posts so far. It seems that people somehow don't remember all the headaches the Outlook+Exchange combo have caused users and admins over the past eight or nine years. Heck, wasn't it just last year that the silly "sorry, we don't know how to program correctly for daylight savings - so all your appointments for the next few weeks will be off by an hour" bug bit so many people?
They still don't know how to deal with daylight savings. Appointments in Outlook/Exchange are sent under the hood in UTC and at the point it's put on the end-users calendar, the appropriate offset is added to account for the timezone they're in. Once it's on their calendar, it doesn't move.
What if the end-user is in a different timezone this week and has changed the timezone on their PC accordingly? What happens to calendar appointments they receive?
What happens if you are sending a recurring appointment and one of the people involved is based in a timezone which doesn't move to DST at the same time as the others? That doesn't work either.
All of the things you're describing as locking these people into Outlook sound like things that could better be handled *outside* of Outlook.
They're probably integrated with Outlook because the problem they solve is fundamentally 70% communication, 30% organising that communication in some fashion. Their plugin provides the 30% organising, Outlook provides the communication.
I could equally ask - why the Hell do so few PDAs and smartphones support IMAP NOTIFY? It gives you push email using a perfectly good standard that works quite happily with any half-decent IMAP server. Concept-wise, it's not drastically different to ActiveSync (client establishes a TCP/IP connection with the server, says "let me know when something new comes in" and keeps the connection open).
I have yet to see an Outlook sync plugin that was worth a damn and I've looked at plugins for Zimbra, OpenExchange, Citadel and generic IMAP servers.
Most of the time, they don't integrate properly at all. "Shared" calendars aren't (or they sync on-demand rather than in realtime, which defeats the whole object of shared calendars because it introduces one race condition for every user on the system), email rules aren't synced (which means that things like out of office don't work), the concept of mailbox ACLs simply doesn't exist.
All of these remain problems with the sync plugin even when the system they're syncing with supports all of these things properly.
Google may (may) have done it right but frankly I doubt it.
I apologise. Clearly I was wrong - some companies are clearly training their staff.
I still don't think it's very many though.
Personally, I dont get this, because while Exchange used to be a nightmare, it is far from that now. In fact, its pretty simple if things are done right from the beginning, and servers are properly maintained.
You would be amazed how many alleged sysadmins couldn't admin their way out of a paper bag. You would be sad at the number of businesses that take the approach "it's not our staff that's the problem, Exchange is such a horror to manage that you need someone who can dedicate their entire life to it".
Perhaps it's because admitting it's your staff that are the problem means admitting that you made a bad hiring decision.
All this droning on about training but I've never seen a company offer any training on anything other than custom applications that are specific to the organisation. Windows and Office training may have happened years ago when computers were new but today...