It's ok for the professor to have them removed, but unless they have signed something saying that the university can confiscate it if necessary, it's illegal to just grab someone's stuff.
If ISPs can identify the content of a.torrent file or the tracker communication, they can detect contributory infringement by analyzing much less traffic.
You think they can decompress an MPEG video stream faster than they can log a 16-bit portion of a TCP/IP header?
Biometric authentication can't be changed. I can change a password, but I can't change my fingerprints.
This won't solve the problem of possible data interception when talking about remote authentication--but every form of authentication is prone to such attacks when transmitted.
No it isn't, because if you use a salted hash (chosen by the server), you can't just replay the traffic.
Sounds a lot like you're saying "they think different to me, but I'm right, so they must be wrong".
Just because you (along with the majority of people) think one thing doesn't mean that you should be able to silence the opinions of the minorities.
We as a people have been cruel, disrepectful, and promoting hatred for thousands of years...don't just think that everyone will suddenly change. Just because the majority has doesn't mean that everyone will.
What's next? Banning anything that doesn't agree with you?
It's fair for them to just delete their accounts and posts (they're violating the TOS after all) but I don't think this kind of thing should be a criminal matter, as the summary seems to say.
Slashdot Mirror
Easy preconfigured tools like the third-party extension to VC which this thread is about?
Even if the waves aren't that big, the water is still moving underneath the surface.
It's ok for the professor to have them removed, but unless they have signed something saying that the university can confiscate it if necessary, it's illegal to just grab someone's stuff.
But following that logic, if tommorrow people stopped buying cars/dvds, they are taking money from you.
Yeah, I was surprised too ;)
License for SSL? You get your CA's public key into the browser and you are now God.
Yeah well even if he is a wanker that doesn't make it ok for someone else to take his stuff.
Would you think it's ok for a cop to just grab your phone? Or if GWB had the SS take yours because you are taking a call during his speech.
Well there's wxWindows which eases porting the MFC programs.
That's not being lost as a result of the copy.
If ISPs can identify the content of a .torrent file or the tracker communication, they can detect contributory infringement by analyzing much less traffic.
You think they can decompress an MPEG video stream faster than they can log a 16-bit portion of a TCP/IP header?
But if they say it isn't finished and it is still being tested, and may not work properly....
That's how I feel about Nethack ;)
Well personally I've never killed myself in C...maybe I should switch to perl and have a look for a module on CPAN ;)
Foolproof? Just get a hair or something, or some saliva off a glass and put it on the sensor.
Now people have to be able to prove their beliefs? When did that start?
Read this. There is no problem faking them.
Not to mention that fingerprints are left EVERYWHERE.
Biometric authentication can't be changed. I can change a password, but I can't change my fingerprints.
This won't solve the problem of possible data interception when talking about remote
authentication--but every form of authentication is prone to such attacks when transmitted.
No it isn't, because if you use a salted hash (chosen by the server), you can't just replay the traffic.
The summary implied that it was going to be a criminal matter.
Most people don't change-- they hold dear the music from when they were growing up
I'm still a teenager, and I think most of the music that is released now is shit. Same with most of my friends...it's all shit.
Is there anyone out there that can do some research on who buys it?
Sounds a lot like you're saying "they think different to me, but I'm right, so they must be wrong".
Just because you (along with the majority of people) think one thing doesn't mean that you should be able to silence the opinions of the minorities.
We as a people have been cruel, disrepectful, and promoting hatred for thousands of years...don't just think that everyone will suddenly change. Just because the majority has doesn't mean that everyone will.
What's next? Banning anything that doesn't agree with you?
It's fair for them to just delete their accounts and posts (they're violating the TOS after all) but I don't think this kind of thing should be a criminal matter, as the summary seems to say.
The TOS says they can't.
....And this is different to real life how?
Hate and racism exists, has always existed, and will always exist.
As much as I hate racism, I don't think that trying to legislate people's beliefs is the answer.
Sure, don't let them act on their beliefs, but if they want to say things, why shouldn't they?
To be honest, I'd prefer not to do my assignments twice ;)
You kidding? Most slashdotters are trying to GET PCs :P