It's a civil case, not a criminal one. In a civil case, everyone is expected to play by the rules.
Frankly, it wouldn't surprise me if the entertainment industry had a few words somewhere to ensure that things were worked this way. Means that the chances of someone trying to destroy the evidence and thus earning a default judgement go through the root.
This is true. See the second half of my comment - "so it was disposed of". What are they going to do, visit the local landfill and search for the drive?
The point I'm driving at is it's all very well saying "Everyone is responsible for their own behaviour and must face the consequences if it's illegal", but history has shown that prison isn't a terribly good way to stop people from reoffending - and to my mind it therefore seems that it's not a particularly effective consequence as far as deterrents go.
Far easier (albeit more dangerous) to wander into the bank with a sawn-off shotgun than to break into a safe.
Of course, the problem there is twofold:
1. Walking into a bank with a sawn off shotgun is a very good way to draw attention to yourself. Solution: walk into the bank with a sawn off cucumber. 2. Walking out of the bank with a back full of cash is also a very good way to draw attention to yourself (and gives you a whole lot of evidence to somehow dispose of). Solution: Hold up a branch of your own bank, have them deposit the money you've stolen directly into your account.
Now, I don't live in the nicest area. I'm not afraid to go out the front door at night, but at the same time there is a relatively high number of thefts. It's the price I pay for being pretty low on the property ladder.
What I've noticed is that houses with large fences or hedges out the front more show signs that they've been burgled (damage around door and window frames, that sort of stuff) than those that don't. Seems to me that keeping my hedge trimmed is actually a pretty good security device;)
Whereupon he will, sooner or later, meet up with a few other nasty little beggars and set up a lucrative business in providing computers with easy to use encryption and fast, secure data wiping facilities to the more modern criminal.
Given the scenario of "subpoena'd to produce hard disk", who's to say it is impossible that the week before the subpoena was served, the previous hard disk failed and was replaced? Unfortunately the failed disk has been disposed of.
Seeing as the circuit board in question generally has the power connector soldered directly onto it, that's a non-issue.
However, "buying another drive of the exact same model" is interesting. Seems to me that if you combine the "switch the power connections" with "use an antiquated hard drive which they will almost certainly be unable to source another of" would solve the problem.
Suddenly I forsee a huge market in 20 year old 5MB hard drives.
If you've been using LVM snapshots - my experience concurs. They suck. However, LVM gives you a lot of other things which do tend to work OK:
An easy means of resizing the block device underlying the filesystem - you don't have to worry about finding out you need to defragment your partitions because you don't have the space where you need it.
Non-destructive extending of LVs beyond the boundaries of a single disk.
Moving LVs between physical disks live - you don't have to umount them.
It may help that my first exposure to the idea of LVM was in AIX, where you don't have much choice in the matter <g>.
Which brings back a point I raised elsewhere in this thread: Wouldn't it make more sense to wait until PayPal sue him and then explain the situation in front of a judge? The only reason I can think of for not doing that is that PayPal figured (after he successfully got rid of the collection agency) that it would be cheaper to just write it off and (optionally) screw up this guy's credit rating.
Therefore, the only possible reason for him to sue is to ensure the "screw up his credit rating" bit doesn't happen. Seeing as how he originally sued PayPal (which would have been the end of it), but settled out of court before suing the purcahser, the only possible reason I can think of is that PayPal's lawyers explained that the contract essentially meant it was his problem, however they would overlook the "screwing up the credit rating" part on condition he sued the original purchaser and gave any winnings to them.
"Software Firewall" is an oxymoron......Not running Windows, but instead running either a proprietary platform or (preferred) something unix-based
What do you think a unix-based (or for that matter proprietary) firewall is based on - software.
If you mean "Running a firewall on the system you're supposed to be protecting" is a bad idea, I'd generally agree. But if you're most concerned about blocking incoming connections, that's less of an issue.
Ideally you'd never get any malicious (sp?) software on your system, so blocking outbound traffic is a non-issue. But in the Windows world, particularly if lots of people are using a system, you can't guarantee that.
As it turns out, the functionality is probably not all that useful and it is pretty universally not used
If we're talking about LVM in general, Fedora Core uses that by default for everything apart from a small/boot partition. And I use LVM on a number of servers.
Specifically, it's the power of the Free Market when the US government decides to effectively "sell" the opportunity to become one of very few Authorised Suppliers of Voting Machines.
Also, banks don't tend to take too kindly to the idea that a machine they bought might be making some mistake like dispensing more money than it should or not recording what it's dispensed.
The people specifying voting machines, OTOH, don't seem too bothered.
Granted, but a lot of that is down to how the software is architected.
IBM, for example, have had all RAID, block-level and partitioning integrated into their LVM under AIX for years. IIRC, you can't have any disk which isn't ultimately handled by the AIX LVM system in some way - even the root "partition" is held as a logical volume.
What I didn't understand was apparently the collection company accepted the package he sent them explaining the situation, and closed the demand to set the dogs on him.
AFAICT, PayPal's only course of action after that is to take him to court - surely he could just sit back and say "Fine. Take me to court"?
I don't need or want points. It's enough to know that I'm not completely surrounded by 14 year olds and perpetual students with zero real world experience.
Slashdot Mirror
It's a civil case, not a criminal one. In a civil case, everyone is expected to play by the rules.
Frankly, it wouldn't surprise me if the entertainment industry had a few words somewhere to ensure that things were worked this way. Means that the chances of someone trying to destroy the evidence and thus earning a default judgement go through the root.
You say that, but I don't think Carly Fiorina ever realised what she was doing to HP.
This is true. See the second half of my comment - "so it was disposed of". What are they going to do, visit the local landfill and search for the drive?
The point I'm driving at is it's all very well saying "Everyone is responsible for their own behaviour and must face the consequences if it's illegal", but history has shown that prison isn't a terribly good way to stop people from reoffending - and to my mind it therefore seems that it's not a particularly effective consequence as far as deterrents go.
Far easier (albeit more dangerous) to wander into the bank with a sawn-off shotgun than to break into a safe.
Of course, the problem there is twofold:
1. Walking into a bank with a sawn off shotgun is a very good way to draw attention to yourself. Solution: walk into the bank with a sawn off cucumber.
2. Walking out of the bank with a back full of cash is also a very good way to draw attention to yourself (and gives you a whole lot of evidence to somehow dispose of). Solution: Hold up a branch of your own bank, have them deposit the money you've stolen directly into your account.
Something similar exists on my street.
;)
Now, I don't live in the nicest area. I'm not afraid to go out the front door at night, but at the same time there is a relatively high number of thefts. It's the price I pay for being pretty low on the property ladder.
What I've noticed is that houses with large fences or hedges out the front more show signs that they've been burgled (damage around door and window frames, that sort of stuff) than those that don't. Seems to me that keeping my hedge trimmed is actually a pretty good security device
Is the purpose of punishment to prevent reoffending or to provide revenge for society? If a bit of both, where should the priority lie?
Whereupon he will, sooner or later, meet up with a few other nasty little beggars and set up a lucrative business in providing computers with easy to use encryption and fast, secure data wiping facilities to the more modern criminal.
Run by AOL on a 386 and a 14.4 modem? How did you get it so reliable?
Funny you should say that, my Mum's vegetarian as well. Not because she loves animals, but because she hates vegetables.
This would be highly illegal, but it's a thought.
Given the scenario of "subpoena'd to produce hard disk", who's to say it is impossible that the week before the subpoena was served, the previous hard disk failed and was replaced? Unfortunately the failed disk has been disposed of.
Seeing as the circuit board in question generally has the power connector soldered directly onto it, that's a non-issue.
However, "buying another drive of the exact same model" is interesting. Seems to me that if you combine the "switch the power connections" with "use an antiquated hard drive which they will almost certainly be unable to source another of" would solve the problem.
Suddenly I forsee a huge market in 20 year old 5MB hard drives.
If you've been using LVM snapshots - my experience concurs. They suck. However, LVM gives you a lot of other things which do tend to work OK:
It may help that my first exposure to the idea of LVM was in AIX, where you don't have much choice in the matter <g>.
Which brings back a point I raised elsewhere in this thread: Wouldn't it make more sense to wait until PayPal sue him and then explain the situation in front of a judge? The only reason I can think of for not doing that is that PayPal figured (after he successfully got rid of the collection agency) that it would be cheaper to just write it off and (optionally) screw up this guy's credit rating.
Therefore, the only possible reason for him to sue is to ensure the "screw up his credit rating" bit doesn't happen. Seeing as how he originally sued PayPal (which would have been the end of it), but settled out of court before suing the purcahser, the only possible reason I can think of is that PayPal's lawyers explained that the contract essentially meant it was his problem, however they would overlook the "screwing up the credit rating" part on condition he sued the original purchaser and gave any winnings to them.
What do you think a unix-based (or for that matter proprietary) firewall is based on - software.
If you mean "Running a firewall on the system you're supposed to be protecting" is a bad idea, I'd generally agree. But if you're most concerned about blocking incoming connections, that's less of an issue.
Ideally you'd never get any malicious (sp?) software on your system, so blocking outbound traffic is a non-issue. But in the Windows world, particularly if lots of people are using a system, you can't guarantee that.
As it turns out, the functionality is probably not all that useful and it is pretty universally not used
/boot partition. And I use LVM on a number of servers.
If we're talking about LVM in general, Fedora Core uses that by default for everything apart from a small
Is it the power of the free market?
Yes.
Specifically, it's the power of the Free Market when the US government decides to effectively "sell" the opportunity to become one of very few Authorised Suppliers of Voting Machines.
Also, banks don't tend to take too kindly to the idea that a machine they bought might be making some mistake like dispensing more money than it should or not recording what it's dispensed.
The people specifying voting machines, OTOH, don't seem too bothered.
Right, but what difference does it make if his account is cancelled or if he just ignores it and leaves it to rot?
Granted, but a lot of that is down to how the software is architected.
IBM, for example, have had all RAID, block-level and partitioning integrated into their LVM under AIX for years. IIRC, you can't have any disk which isn't ultimately handled by the AIX LVM system in some way - even the root "partition" is held as a logical volume.
What I didn't understand was apparently the collection company accepted the package he sent them explaining the situation, and closed the demand to set the dogs on him.
AFAICT, PayPal's only course of action after that is to take him to court - surely he could just sit back and say "Fine. Take me to court"?
Obviously people don't usually bruteforce encrypted files
;)
Depends if you consider rubber hose cryptanalysis to be an application of brute force
If Vista is written modularly and has a clean, well documented API
Sorry, I've lost you there.
It is said that they who do not remember history are doomed to repeat it:
c net
http://news.com.com/2100-1023-279561.html?legacy=
I don't need or want points. It's enough to know that I'm not completely surrounded by 14 year olds and perpetual students with zero real world experience.