if you think the risk/return ratio is acceptable, go ahead. it's just that i personally feel that the risk in unacceptable for me.
if i was being instructed to do that, i would be getting a union rep and/or my lawyer with me double-quick, as it is unquestionably illegal and i am not hanging my ass out so the company can save a few bucks.
i'm not saying i don't acquire software without paying for it at home, but that's at home and i'm just one single user. they do not care about 1 guy, and, as you said, they would typically rather you steal theirs than use the competition's, but when you're talking tens/hundreds/thousands of licenses on a corporate level, it's a much bigger, juicier target.
and just FTR, i'm not american either. i'm canadian.
Sure its a corporation, and not an individual doing the infringing, but could that be it?
the problem being that you can be held legally liable for it. it is extremely unlikely that the people currently telling you to do this will not hesitate to hang you out to dry if/when the shit hits the fan. that means lawsuits, potential criminal charges, and the resulting trashed reputation.
as for your other points:
1. so? this isn't a microsoft vs. everyone else thing. this is a legal issue.
2. depends. a relatively small company starts on this path, then 5 years down the road, they're not so small and have hundreds of non-licensed copies in use. the BSA decides they want their money. the board has the option of pay up or get hammered in court, and a sizable internal scandel develops, resulting in fingers pointing at you and you being foisted up in court. "this was never authorized by anyone. he is entirely responsible for it."
3. yes, but if a small company starts it early on, it really tends to snowball, leading up to the previously mentioned senario.
4. i wouldn't be backing the RIAA and no one i see is backing microsoft/BSA. they're concerned with not having their life completely (and possiblely irreperablely) fucked up if the BSA decides that they want their money.
5. that would only apply to the small scale. if you're a hundred-million-dollar company with a lot of unlicensed software, they do not hesiate to go after you, as you're unlikely to go through the massive hassle of changing software, so they want their money.
Just because someone didn't put in enough security doesn't mean you are justified in breaking the rules.
i routinely have to bypass IT's "security" in order to get anything done. 11 times in the past 4 months, IT's filters have blocked parts of the college's own site, not to mention several relevant wikipedia articles (everything from NAND universality to the article on Novel Netware), and other items extremely relevant (and often critically nessesary, such as the pages containing the actual lab assignments) to my studies.
and as is seemingly typical of buracrasies, trying to legitimately get a site unblocked is an utter nightmare. 3 double-sided, legal-sheet forms, which will only unblock 1 single page, without the option for, say, a multi-page article being unblocked, which means filling out the forms multiple times.
i do not have time to deal with their inane BS, especially near the end of the semester, and the instructors in the technology dept. fully acknowledge it, as there is a seemingly constant battle between IT and technology over some of the inane stuff IT pulls.
though IT seems to full well know that they are idiots and have never come after anyone for bypassing their filters. they likely know that if they did, it would set off a full-scale war going all the way to college presidant, who, IIRC, used to be the dean of technology, so it is not a war IT would win.
But oddly enough noone does that when a kid is being thrown out of school and labeled a terrorist for creating a game level, a 17 year old kid is marked as a pedophile for making out with a 15 year old girlfriend.
1. getting that running takes a little time. if you'll look up a bit, people are spooling it up, with contact info for the people responsible for this posted.
2. i've seen a bunch of outrage on that, though trying to effect changes to those laws is difficult, as it is political suicide to even think of changing laws that protect children from evil pedofiles, and politions tend to be concerned first and foremost with keeping their jobs.
Not that it prevented him from being infected with a raging case of stupid once he moved to Texas.
call the man what you will, but stupid is one thing that he isn't. the man is being profoundly successful in getting what he wants done, legal, illegal, or questionable, and getting away with it (so far) is it is one of the latter two catagories.
I really hope people get off their asses and vote these idiots out of office.
and vote who in? as an outside observer (a friendly neighbor from the north), i really can't tell what politicians are from which party based on what they believe/say they believe.
the whole 2-party system seems almost deliberately set to impede change or progress (and we all know what the opposite of progress seems to be).
not being pessimistic, just realistic based on observable trends, though that's no reason to give up, as, who knows, things might improve. though a rouge planet could also appear out of nowhere and smash the earth to powder.
it isn't the symbol, it's the number (1 though 7) inside the symbol, which identifies what type of plastic it is.
i.e. 1 is polyethylene terephthalate, and is things like soda bottles, type 7 is mixed plastics and (usually) cannot be recycled and is used in most blisterpac, etc.
To be fair, some (like the one in my bathroom) have a 1/2 turn on time but then a very long (~1 minute) warm up time. It comes on bright enough (maybe like a 50W incandescent), but after being on for close to a minute it suddenly ramps over a few seconds up to probably 150% of its previous brightness, then stays there.
i have the same sort of effect from the ones in my bathroom and i love that effect. it gives my eyes time to adjust so i don't get blinded when i stumble into the bathroom at 3am.
the Canadians going for a "Charter of Rights and Freedoms" that can be changed at any time whenever Parliament thinks it convenient rather than something with teeth in it is going to bite them collectively on the ass
hmm. i haven't heard of anyone moving to change the amending procedures for the constitution. where can i get more information about this? as if you're not hyperboling, I've got some letters to write to my MP.
granted, they do have the "notwithstanding clause", but using that to end-run around the courts is generally political suicide.
the article says "energetic particles", which i'm pretty sure qualify as "solid objects". to deflect larger objects, i would think you could just make it orders of magnitude stronger.
Slashdot Mirror
if you think the risk/return ratio is acceptable, go ahead. it's just that i personally feel that the risk in unacceptable for me.
if i was being instructed to do that, i would be getting a union rep and/or my lawyer with me double-quick, as it is unquestionably illegal and i am not hanging my ass out so the company can save a few bucks.
i'm not saying i don't acquire software without paying for it at home, but that's at home and i'm just one single user. they do not care about 1 guy, and, as you said, they would typically rather you steal theirs than use the competition's, but when you're talking tens/hundreds/thousands of licenses on a corporate level, it's a much bigger, juicier target.
and just FTR, i'm not american either. i'm canadian.
Sure its a corporation, and not an individual doing the infringing, but could that be it?
the problem being that you can be held legally liable for it. it is extremely unlikely that the people currently telling you to do this will not hesitate to hang you out to dry if/when the shit hits the fan. that means lawsuits, potential criminal charges, and the resulting trashed reputation.
as for your other points:
1. so? this isn't a microsoft vs. everyone else thing. this is a legal issue.
2. depends. a relatively small company starts on this path, then 5 years down the road, they're not so small and have hundreds of non-licensed copies in use. the BSA decides they want their money. the board has the option of pay up or get hammered in court, and a sizable internal scandel develops, resulting in fingers pointing at you and you being foisted up in court. "this was never authorized by anyone. he is entirely responsible for it."
3. yes, but if a small company starts it early on, it really tends to snowball, leading up to the previously mentioned senario.
4. i wouldn't be backing the RIAA and no one i see is backing microsoft/BSA. they're concerned with not having their life completely (and possiblely irreperablely) fucked up if the BSA decides that they want their money.
5. that would only apply to the small scale. if you're a hundred-million-dollar company with a lot of unlicensed software, they do not hesiate to go after you, as you're unlikely to go through the massive hassle of changing software, so they want their money.
Just because someone didn't put in enough security doesn't mean you are justified in breaking the rules.
i routinely have to bypass IT's "security" in order to get anything done. 11 times in the past 4 months, IT's filters have blocked parts of the college's own site, not to mention several relevant wikipedia articles (everything from NAND universality to the article on Novel Netware), and other items extremely relevant (and often critically nessesary, such as the pages containing the actual lab assignments) to my studies.
and as is seemingly typical of buracrasies, trying to legitimately get a site unblocked is an utter nightmare. 3 double-sided, legal-sheet forms, which will only unblock 1 single page, without the option for, say, a multi-page article being unblocked, which means filling out the forms multiple times.
i do not have time to deal with their inane BS, especially near the end of the semester, and the instructors in the technology dept. fully acknowledge it, as there is a seemingly constant battle between IT and technology over some of the inane stuff IT pulls.
though IT seems to full well know that they are idiots and have never come after anyone for bypassing their filters. they likely know that if they did, it would set off a full-scale war going all the way to college presidant, who, IIRC, used to be the dean of technology, so it is not a war IT would win.
But oddly enough noone does that when a kid is being thrown out of school and labeled a terrorist for creating a game level, a 17 year old kid is marked as a pedophile for making out with a 15 year old girlfriend.
1. getting that running takes a little time. if you'll look up a bit, people are spooling it up, with contact info for the people responsible for this posted.
2. i've seen a bunch of outrage on that, though trying to effect changes to those laws is difficult, as it is political suicide to even think of changing laws that protect children from evil pedofiles, and politions tend to be concerned first and foremost with keeping their jobs.
Not that it prevented him from being infected with a raging case of stupid once he moved to Texas.
call the man what you will, but stupid is one thing that he isn't. the man is being profoundly successful in getting what he wants done, legal, illegal, or questionable, and getting away with it (so far) is it is one of the latter two catagories.
Bullshit. He and his parents need to file a lawsuit and smack the "authorities" down.
doing that and covering tracks would be the best idea. they aren't mutally exclusive.
Why is there no punishment for people who attempt to unjustly use the legal system to send others to jail?
because the people who attempt (and seemingly suceed a good percent of the time) are the ones who decide on what the punishments for what are.
I really hope people get off their asses and vote these idiots out of office.
and vote who in? as an outside observer (a friendly neighbor from the north), i really can't tell what politicians are from which party based on what they believe/say they believe.
the whole 2-party system seems almost deliberately set to impede change or progress (and we all know what the opposite of progress seems to be).
not being pessimistic, just realistic based on observable trends, though that's no reason to give up, as, who knows, things might improve. though a rouge planet could also appear out of nowhere and smash the earth to powder.
yes, but was i was asking was, did they just ignore the letter or did they actively tell them to go fuck themselves with a rake?
and how exactly did they respond to that? silence or a 5-bit binary 4?
it isn't the symbol, it's the number (1 though 7) inside the symbol, which identifies what type of plastic it is.
i.e. 1 is polyethylene terephthalate, and is things like soda bottles, type 7 is mixed plastics and (usually) cannot be recycled and is used in most blisterpac, etc.
To be fair, some (like the one in my bathroom) have a 1/2 turn on time but then a very long (~1 minute) warm up time. It comes on bright enough (maybe like a 50W incandescent), but after being on for close to a minute it suddenly ramps over a few seconds up to probably 150% of its previous brightness, then stays there.
i have the same sort of effect from the ones in my bathroom and i love that effect. it gives my eyes time to adjust so i don't get blinded when i stumble into the bathroom at 3am.
Whatever happened to just calling them wires?
that died when the wires became optical fibres.
but you can make him disappear for good and go back to the pefectly fine win2k search interface.
7 /
http://www.pctools.com/guides/registry/detail/106
Here in the US we had to go through endless repetitions of "Start Me Up" for the Windows 95 launch.
on the other hand, it did provide a nice opening for Weird Al to poke fun at win 95.
correct me if i'm wrong, but doesn't the constitution only apply to interactions between the people and their government?
if so, it would have no effect on any law regarding bussiness, as a bussiness would be bound by no such restrictions.
not a guy. she's a woman by the name of Joy Smith from winnipeg.
here's her site http://www.joysmith.ca/
what is this then?
the charter is part of our constitution.
You aren't born with AIDS
yes, you can be. if your mother had it, odds are damn good you will.
Ah, that's why dogs don't like sweet food.
modern dogs aren't predators, they're omnivores.
Make sure people can pronounce your damn product name. How the hell do you say Umnbutooo?!? Is that an African word? What does it mean?!?!
i haven't seen anyone having trouble pronouncing it in the real world. it's you-boon-too.
and yes, it is an african word. it's a humanist idealology, fitting with the ubuntu motto of "linux for human beings".
though i do agree with you that the codenames are silly. still, there's no need to add it to the name.
i also don't get a lot of software names, but hey, they make it, they name it, and i might use it.
the Canadians going for a "Charter of Rights and Freedoms" that can be changed at any time whenever Parliament thinks it convenient rather than something with teeth in it is going to bite them collectively on the ass
hmm. i haven't heard of anyone moving to change the amending procedures for the constitution. where can i get more information about this? as if you're not hyperboling, I've got some letters to write to my MP.
granted, they do have the "notwithstanding clause", but using that to end-run around the courts is generally political suicide.
and the bigger kicker in all of this is that he is not even the defendant. it is his mother that is being sued.
not sure if you're trolling or not, but i am presently enrolled in a computer engineering course.
the article says "energetic particles", which i'm pretty sure qualify as "solid objects". to deflect larger objects, i would think you could just make it orders of magnitude stronger.