For one, I find it hilarious that your name falls right into your first few lines.
Anyway, yes, your points are all valid. I have not heard of many scams involving legitimate activity on Craigslist, either. Most people I know who were scammed were trying to do the equivalent of buying speakers out of the back of a van.
but if you understand the number of reasons why vigilante justice is wrong, then you understand how the manner in which he got his commeuppance is wrong
condemning fortuny is not standing up for the cheater. its standing against vigiliante justice
So, you're saying that only the cheater should tell his or her spouse of the extramarital activity, and anyone else who does is an outlaw vigilante that should be punishes?
How is this ANY different than Chris Hansen on Dateline NBC in "To Catch a Predator." Other than the "bait" not pretending to be 17, what's the difference?
I wouldn't consider this guy a troll. A prankster, maybe, but not a troll. Come on, though. Re-publishing responses to fake sex ads is just comedy GOLD!
and they will add my ca just like that. is that it. what is the point of doing such stampede, if they are to add countless cas that are going to apply, then ?
I understand that perfect grammar, punctuation, and capitalization are not require to post on the Internet. Everyone makes mistakes. All I ask is that you at least put in a little effort.
With that said, no, the Mozilla CA approval process is not "just like that." See this page for more details.
looks like I will have to switch to internet explorer to access self signed https extranet. There are various cases where you do not need any third party to prove your identity. Firefox 2.X was already quite annoying with this. Firefox 3 seems to be even more.
I'm sorry. You installed Firefox 2.x and Firefox 3. You read Slashdot. You are familiar enough with some web security and encryption lingo. But... you don't know how to add a site into the "Allowed" list?
The market for high end "enterprise" drives is almost dead. When was the last time you saw a SCSI (FC,SAS) drive?
I can look over my shoulder at approximately 45 FC drives, 60-70 Ultra320 SCSI Drives, and another dozen or two SAS drives. That's just from my little window into the server room.
Enterprise class drives are far from dead. Unless, of course, you just can't afford them.
The contract in question is not the End User License Agreement as far as I'm aware, it is the Terms of Service agreement. As far as your "Blizzard dictates, take it or leave it" point goes... isn't that how most contracts work? One side states their terms, the other side decides whether or not to accept?
So, this Oil Shale you keep talking about. How much of it is located offshore?
Oh wait, it's in Colorado. And Utah. And Wyoming. How much of your precious oil shale will this "critical Energy Policy shift" drill up? Exactly zero barrels.
Do you think pumping money into Big Oil's pockets to drill offshore will solve our energy crisis? Seriously? Why not spin it some more? I'm sure we can accuse the democrats of manufacturing child pornography and terrorism while we're at it.
No, it doesn't make any sense.
Reading that someone working in a similar environment has identified a security issue doesn't prove anything. For example, someone may have misidentified the problem and only found a partial solution or a solution that only masks the symptoms. There are a multitude of online forums that attest to this happening.
Perhaps I didn't make myself clear. Solutions are a completely different matter. All I was addressing is the boolean answer to "Is this product secure?".
If it has a security hole, it is not secure. (Disproved).
If nobody has found a security hole, it may just not be an obvious enough hole. (Insufficient evidence to prove)
Now, moving into the realm of workarounds, feasibility, acceptable vulnerability, etc. gets sticky beyond imagination. That's a judgment call, more than anything.
IAANAL, but is a breach of TOS the same as a breach of contract? That is, is a usage license the same as a contract?
EULAs are very sticky. Most of the issues stem from whether software is "licensed or sold," or from the fact that the consumer has little recourse if he or she does not accept the license ("No returns on opened software")
Terms of Service contracts, the type which you agree to prior to the exchange of funds or use of the service, are more cut and dry. Unless a clause is unconscionable, it is just as binding as any other contract.
To make things even more complicated and hard to research, many lawyer types and media outlets do not distinguish between the two of these, or the sometimes confusing terms "clickwrap license," "browserwrap license," "shrinkwrap license," etc.
The fact that the software is called "WoW Glider" and that it is marketed and designed specifically for the sole purpose cheating in WoW carries it safely over the line from "making available" to "inducement to breach the contract."
Don't bring firearms into this, it's a completely different ballpark. They have other legitimate uses.
Intentional Interference with Contractual Relations A tort that arises when a third party induces a contracting party to breach the contract with another party.
The following elements must be shown:
- A valid, enforceable contract between the contracting parties.
- Third-party knowledge of this contract.
- Third-party inducement to breach the contract.
The plural of "anecdote" is not "data." Also, usability and security aren't really related. If someone complains about a product, for the most part, it will not be because there is a buffer overflow vulnerability for the 4th input field.
Slashdot Mirror
For one, I find it hilarious that your name falls right into your first few lines.
Anyway, yes, your points are all valid. I have not heard of many scams involving legitimate activity on Craigslist, either. Most people I know who were scammed were trying to do the equivalent of buying speakers out of the back of a van.
but if you understand the number of reasons why vigilante justice is wrong, then you understand how the manner in which he got his commeuppance is wrong
condemning fortuny is not standing up for the cheater. its standing against vigiliante justice
So, you're saying that only the cheater should tell his or her spouse of the extramarital activity, and anyone else who does is an outlaw vigilante that should be punishes?
Providing counseling to a suicidal individual, and the records associated with it, falls under guidelines regulating medical records.
Sorry for the double-top post, but...
How is this ANY different than Chris Hansen on Dateline NBC in "To Catch a Predator." Other than the "bait" not pretending to be 17, what's the difference?
I wouldn't consider this guy a troll. A prankster, maybe, but not a troll. Come on, though. Re-publishing responses to fake sex ads is just comedy GOLD!
Purely a guess: getting nailed to a log just for suggesting that people should try to be a little bit nicer to each other.
Oh yeah, and claiming to be the bastard child of a peasant woman and the supreme deity of a large chunk of the population.
The Constitution applies to any individual on U.S. soil, not just citizens.
Although, for purposes of border control, almost any search is considered lawful.
and they will add my ca just like that. is that it. what is the point of doing such stampede, if they are to add countless cas that are going to apply, then ?
I understand that perfect grammar, punctuation, and capitalization are not require to post on the Internet. Everyone makes mistakes. All I ask is that you at least put in a little effort.
With that said, no, the Mozilla CA approval process is not "just like that." See this page for more details.
looks like I will have to switch to internet explorer to access self signed https extranet. There are various cases where you do not need any third party to prove your identity. Firefox 2.X was already quite annoying with this. Firefox 3 seems to be even more.
I'm sorry. You installed Firefox 2.x and Firefox 3. You read Slashdot. You are familiar enough with some web security and encryption lingo. But... you don't know how to add a site into the "Allowed" list?
do you know the wildcard ssl prices ?
you dont.
Ours was $500 per year. It's not EV, but it works just fine.
If you can't afford that, then you're in a lot more trouble than whether or not the unwashed masses freak out when they see your page.
Then go buy a cheap SSL certificate signed by a default CA. Or, start your own CA and contact the Mozilla Foundation to be added.
The market for high end "enterprise" drives is almost dead. When was the last time you saw a SCSI (FC,SAS) drive?
I can look over my shoulder at approximately 45 FC drives, 60-70 Ultra320 SCSI Drives, and another dozen or two SAS drives. That's just from my little window into the server room.
Enterprise class drives are far from dead. Unless, of course, you just can't afford them.
Loan documents. Mortgages. Rental agreements. Lease agreements. Pricing at a retail store. Rewards.
I can think of quite a few examples of "take it or leave it" contracts.
The contract in question is not the End User License Agreement as far as I'm aware, it is the Terms of Service agreement. As far as your "Blizzard dictates, take it or leave it" point goes... isn't that how most contracts work? One side states their terms, the other side decides whether or not to accept?
So, this Oil Shale you keep talking about. How much of it is located offshore?
Oh wait, it's in Colorado. And Utah. And Wyoming. How much of your precious oil shale will this "critical Energy Policy shift" drill up? Exactly zero barrels.
No, the house adjourned right on time. The ones left were a minority of children who stamped their feet when they didn't get their way.
Or, are you saying that twelve republicans left in the dark is the result of a coup by the democrats?
Do you think pumping money into Big Oil's pockets to drill offshore will solve our energy crisis? Seriously? Why not spin it some more? I'm sure we can accuse the democrats of manufacturing child pornography and terrorism while we're at it.
Strawman much? How about we throw the baby out with the bathwater.
No, it doesn't make any sense. Reading that someone working in a similar environment has identified a security issue doesn't prove anything. For example, someone may have misidentified the problem and only found a partial solution or a solution that only masks the symptoms. There are a multitude of online forums that attest to this happening.
Perhaps I didn't make myself clear. Solutions are a completely different matter. All I was addressing is the boolean answer to "Is this product secure?".
If it has a security hole, it is not secure. (Disproved).
If nobody has found a security hole, it may just not be an obvious enough hole. (Insufficient evidence to prove)
Now, moving into the realm of workarounds, feasibility, acceptable vulnerability, etc. gets sticky beyond imagination. That's a judgment call, more than anything.
IAANAL, but is a breach of TOS the same as a breach of contract? That is, is a usage license the same as a contract?
EULAs are very sticky. Most of the issues stem from whether software is "licensed or sold," or from the fact that the consumer has little recourse if he or she does not accept the license ("No returns on opened software")
Terms of Service contracts, the type which you agree to prior to the exchange of funds or use of the service, are more cut and dry. Unless a clause is unconscionable, it is just as binding as any other contract.
To make things even more complicated and hard to research, many lawyer types and media outlets do not distinguish between the two of these, or the sometimes confusing terms "clickwrap license," "browserwrap license," "shrinkwrap license," etc.
More interesting reading.
The fact that the software is called "WoW Glider" and that it is marketed and designed specifically for the sole purpose cheating in WoW carries it safely over the line from "making available" to "inducement to breach the contract."
Don't bring firearms into this, it's a completely different ballpark. They have other legitimate uses.
If you think about it, it makes sense.
..." disproves that a product is secure.
"I haven't had any problems" proves nothing about the security of the product.
"I have discovered this security flaw
Of course, if it's security related, even an anecdote can disprove that a product is secure.
(from a presentation based upon a textbook)
Intentional Interference with Contractual Relations
A tort that arises when a third party induces a contracting party to breach the contract with another party.
The following elements must be shown:
- A valid, enforceable contract between the contracting parties.
- Third-party knowledge of this contract.
- Third-party inducement to breach the contract.
The plural of "anecdote" is not "data." Also, usability and security aren't really related. If someone complains about a product, for the most part, it will not be because there is a buffer overflow vulnerability for the 4th input field.