Isn't implying something the same as saying it, in cases where saying something would be illegal?
No.
There are a ton of nuances here, and a huge mess of precedent that carries things in different directions depending on what exactly one is talking about. But generally in contract law, agreeing to affirmative behaviours ("I will buy only your product") is considerably different than exclusionary behaviours ("I will not buy product X").The reasons for this are complicated, but in large part have to do with a strong dislike for cartels during the 19th century, and with a desire to frown upon active interference in another's business.
(And avoid that question like the plague if you're talking criminal law, unless you enjoy reading hair-splitting legalese.)
And where would that place explicitly shadowy but implicitly clear definitions as 'loyal customer discounts'?
There is absolutely nothing wrong or illegal with price discrimination, modulo antitrust, civil rights laws, and anti-dumping statutes (Actually, I'm probably missing a few constraints here.).
So giving discounts for cash, or for having a certain piece of plastic, or buying in volume or frequently, is just fine. Which is as it should be.
One Time Pads are not a cryptographic algorithm (eg RSA, Eliptic Curve) but a technique (eg X509). Therefore the key size depends upon the technique used.
No, if your key size is not equal the length of the message, you are not using a one time pad.
Who cares what a company runs? Redhat could compile under MSVC++*, and they'd be different than Yahoo. Either you're a troll or you simply don't get the difference between companies who build software and companies that offer services. Given your last sentence, I think you're a troll, but I'm trying to be nice.
*That would be a problem in a different sort of way (and of course would not work), but doesn't detract to the point I'm making, which is that there is a difference between offering software which is licensed under terms considered free, and offering services using free software, which can be licesnsed any which way, modulo some restrictions with some licenses.
More crack, anyone? I've got a great patent-vs-trademark discussion over here...
A lot of folks who might know some folks watch the list. Plus, your analysis is the best one I've seen so far on what's going on - this is of interest to others doing security, if nothing else.
Didn't mean to annoy you. Yes, in theory, the Lanham Act would appear to trump the UC name ownership laws. In practice, this would be a tough case to argue and probably cost quite a bit more than a couple of students can manage. (I could be misremembering this, but I think the California statutes were enacted to give schools a franchise monopoly on sports t-shirts and whatnot.) That's the other side of the law - money frequently wins.
California reserves namespace for universities. Your examples do not address this fact. This is not a trademark dispute - California law explicity reserves the string "UCSD", for instance, for use by the university so named. (By the way, you're also misapprehending trademark law, in a subtle but important way. Talk to a lawyer about any plans you may have for toying with trademarks.)
Like I said, it is stupid. It is also really easy to route around and use to make the university look as stupid as they are being.
I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice, and anyone who takes this as legal advice is a moron.
And when the music becomes available, iPod users will post and whinge and blame their lack of support on Microsoft, and Apple, who refuse to open up iTunes.
A media player plays MP3s. Several other formats. Some formats, granted, are restictive in terms of freedom.
Others are not. Say, MP3s.
By not "opening up" to WMA, Apple is playing the same game Microsoft tried to play with Quicktime, back when they noticed that media was going to matter.
WMA is a fringe format. AAC is, too. They both are fighting a marketing war. Apple seems to be winning. This is interesting, because Apple is using slightly less restrictive crap than Microfost is. That appears to piss off a lot of people. I don't think that Apple's take is all that great, but it is amusing that people get sooo pissed off. One can hear the MBAs slapping biners shut and going back for another class in frustration.
"Open up?" Yes, and would you like me to swallow, too? Come on. No pun intended.
UniversityCensorsShallDie.com
UnpleasantCancerousStatistDicks.com
UCannotStopDissent.com
I could go on for hours, and a decent graphic designer can play games with the image in a way that lets you let off steam without getting more letters. If you're careful.
Fact is, the law states that the Uni is in the right here. So rub them through the mud. If this site was useful to students, then this is nothing but great publicity for the site now - use the short time you have to register something else and publicise it, and go from there.
Just don't get caught up on a losing battle over a name that you can't win. It doesn't matter if it is a dumb rule, it happens to be law. Make them not want to enforce it instead of just plain losing.
> Microsoft released yesterday a whole bunch of critical security updates.
Their new policy is to release monthly updates unless an exploit already exists, in which case a patch is immediately released.
How, exactly, are you contradicting the author?
> Of course a firewall will offer some protection but shouldn't be relied on
You don't know what you're talking about, submitter Dynamoo. Please, tell us why one shouldn't rely on a firewall? If you read the technical documentation about the flaw you see "If users have blocked the NetBIOS ports (ports 137-139) - and UDP broadcast packets using a firewall, others will not be able to send messages to them on those ports." (under "Technical Descriptions"). I think I'll ignore your advice and keep a firewall in place, no matter what OS I'm using.
I don't believe the author is telling you to remove your firewall. The author is saying that it shouldn't be relied upon. There is a significant difference. Because some other machine behind the same firewall might become infected, a firewall is not a perfect measure for protecting against this attack. There's a well worn phrase for this problem - "crunchy on the outside, chewey on the inside."
So, again, please explain how Another rabid submitter gets it wrong?
Would you say the same if store bought computers with Lindows had Mozilla by default?
I can't speak to the parent poster's point, because I am not that person, but I can say that yes indeed, once Lindows and the Mozilla Foundation start dominating the industry and putting others out of business, I will be the first to cry foul.
And btw, integrating the browser with the OS [this particular OS] *makes sense*. Similar to KDE the file browser/explorer re-uses the codebase as the web browser.
You know, I just don't see it. Color me out of touch. File management and display of structured documents don't seem to me to be a natural combination. I *know* everyone seems to think it makes sense, and to some limited degree knowledge of a file's contents makes sense in a file manager, but browsing? I don't get it. It might as well have been integrated Gopher.
Make no mistake - admins who fail to patch deserve to be fired.
(Sure, can be that something else was important, etc. But failure to manage business systems as a pattern is grounds for replacement.)
Caveats aside, there is a serious difference between developers and admins. You appear to have a problem with the difference. To quote:
How can 4 weeks be considered a reasonable amount of time to fix a bug and issue a patch when IT people who merely DEPLOY the frick'in patch complain that 4 weeks isn't enough time to deploy a patch?
Well, for starters, the people producing the patch have many, many more engineers than your average small business. They also sold the software in question, which at least hints at what it should do, and when it doesn't hints at how the producer should, if it wants to preserve a good faith, behave. See, when a company sells software for a given function, they tend to be asserting that they have some idea about the area they're covering.
On the other hand, Admins have to run around waving hands not only for dumb things, but whenever a patch is released. One can say "Oh, just patch". Try that in a plucky small business context.
Sorry. Point is, don't assume that admins can patch as soon as something is released. Many times, you can't. Sometimes, you won't. Conflating engineering time with admin time is silly.
--A former admin, thank dog I'm not doing that now.
Blog, yes. Sorry, I'm getting used to a new keyboard (which I'm finding I don't really like) and wasn't paying enough attention to what I was typing.
Although in theory I like the idea of starting a blob, I'm not quite sure what is involved in doing so or what the eventual outcome would be, so I can't really enjoin you to start one.
+2 karma points, not to mention you should start a blob, if you have the intestinal fortitiude.
I'm not a Democrat. I like some actions Democrats support. I'm not a Republican. I'm actually really pissed off at all the stupid shit they're doing right now in the name of political advantage at the cost of any ideals one might have had. I'm not a Libertarian. My message is, you can all bite me.
I am a small government type, maybe no government type, and what I see is that the Republicans are the new tax and spend queens. Just look at how much they're bleeding future tax money.
I'm not sure what your problem may be, I don't care. The really cool part is that you're playing the classic game well known to 5 year olds, wherein one is held firm in self-assesment via denigration of others, with no rational reason. In other words, "I'm like rubber, you're like glue.".
Given that you're happy on this level of discourse, perhaps this will make some sense: you're a dumb shit.
Happy? Now everyone's conversing on the same level.
Um, what was it that you had to say?
If you have more scorn with which to trash a cool artist whom happened to be awarded a private grant, go nuts. I'm sure you'd feel so much anger if you were awarded such an honor. Oh, wait, you never will be, because you're nothing but a sniper. So, you can happily feel scorn for the people you never can be.
I'd feel sad for you, but damn, you make it hard to be charitable. Fucking do something. Don't be a jerk.
Only neo-con, big business puppets suggest that teachers are paid too much.
Don't be a moron. Teachers are clearly paid the amount that equals how the US society values them, modulo union and elected politician interference.
If teachers want more money, they should make a better case for paying them better. One of the best cases to make is to stop teaching and do something else that pays what they deserve.
I'm about as anti-bush as one can be. I can't wait until he's voted out and replaced by a Democrat.
Assuming people who don't feel for the teachers are all "neocon, big business puppets" is not only wrong, but shows how limited your own political world is.
...why you'll never win such an award. You appear to be incapable of understanding why it is awarded.
Re:What's wrong with national IDs?
on
Beyond Fear
·
· Score: 1
It's almost chilling to hear how easy it is to loose your identity and get your credit rating trashed just because someone got your home address and Birth Date.
Yes, I'm well aware of that - I've had a mild form happen to me (someone got enough info to open two credit cards, and I caught it quickly - it wasn't as bad as it could have been).
In Germany for example medical records are not allowed to be kept for more than 5 years (bit me in the ass a while ago when I tried to get some results from some years back), here? Nobody cares.
This has nothing to do with a national ID.
On the other hand an ID card etc. in North America IS a lot more scary because the government / private companies never ever seem to get rid of the data they have collected, that is the problem, not the ID card(s).
Which is exactly why I object so strongly to having a national ID. All it would do is make life easier for snoops, identity thieves, and meddlesome government. There is no benefit to the citizen, and plenty of downsides.
Re:What's wrong with national IDs?
on
Beyond Fear
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
I don't know if these cards would stop anybody from crashing airplanes, but they do help against things like identity theft, which is quite common in America but almost unheard of here. We don't have to have "three kinds of photo id" to go to bank, we don't consider our mother's maiden name or SS#'s security secrets, and we don't need to bring the electic bill to rent a movie.
Most of what you cite is convenience. It may be convenient to have one card for everything, but that doesn't mean making it mandatory is a good idea. Identity theft can be stopped in other ways, and it isn't even clear to me that a national ID card would do much to stop it here at all.
The US started differently than European nations, and has a long history of distrust of the government. I still believe this is a valuble thing.
The only party getting value out of national ID cards is the government. Why should I quietly give that to them? I have no reason to.
Slashdot Mirror
Are you using images with Fop?
How's that going for you?
We've had no luck, and Apache's image examples are currently broken, which is not giving me a good feeling...
"Should I wear white or green socks with these pants?"
"Oven ranges: Olive or Off-white?"
Must be a really slow day over at Slashdot HQ...
No.
There are a ton of nuances here, and a huge mess of precedent that carries things in different directions depending on what exactly one is talking about. But generally in contract law, agreeing to affirmative behaviours ("I will buy only your product") is considerably different than exclusionary behaviours ("I will not buy product X").The reasons for this are complicated, but in large part have to do with a strong dislike for cartels during the 19th century, and with a desire to frown upon active interference in another's business.
(And avoid that question like the plague if you're talking criminal law, unless you enjoy reading hair-splitting legalese.)
And where would that place explicitly shadowy but implicitly clear definitions as 'loyal customer discounts'?
There is absolutely nothing wrong or illegal with price discrimination, modulo antitrust, civil rights laws, and anti-dumping statutes (Actually, I'm probably missing a few constraints here.).
So giving discounts for cash, or for having a certain piece of plastic, or buying in volume or frequently, is just fine. Which is as it should be.
No, if your key size is not equal the length of the message, you are not using a one time pad.
*That would be a problem in a different sort of way (and of course would not work), but doesn't detract to the point I'm making, which is that there is a difference between offering software which is licensed under terms considered free, and offering services using free software, which can be licesnsed any which way, modulo some restrictions with some licenses.
More crack, anyone? I've got a great patent-vs-trademark discussion over here...
A lot of folks who might know some folks watch the list. Plus, your analysis is the best one I've seen so far on what's going on - this is of interest to others doing security, if nothing else.
Didn't mean to annoy you. Yes, in theory, the Lanham Act would appear to trump the UC name ownership laws. In practice, this would be a tough case to argue and probably cost quite a bit more than a couple of students can manage. (I could be misremembering this, but I think the California statutes were enacted to give schools a franchise monopoly on sports t-shirts and whatnot.) That's the other side of the law - money frequently wins.
Like I said, it is stupid. It is also really easy to route around and use to make the university look as stupid as they are being.
I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice, and anyone who takes this as legal advice is a moron.
A media player plays MP3s. Several other formats. Some formats, granted, are restictive in terms of freedom.
Others are not. Say, MP3s.
By not "opening up" to WMA, Apple is playing the same game Microsoft tried to play with Quicktime, back when they noticed that media was going to matter.
WMA is a fringe format. AAC is, too. They both are fighting a marketing war. Apple seems to be winning. This is interesting, because Apple is using slightly less restrictive crap than Microfost is. That appears to piss off a lot of people. I don't think that Apple's take is all that great, but it is amusing that people get sooo pissed off. One can hear the MBAs slapping biners shut and going back for another class in frustration.
"Open up?" Yes, and would you like me to swallow, too? Come on. No pun intended.
UnpleasantCancerousStatistDicks.com
UCannotStopDissent.com
I could go on for hours, and a decent graphic designer can play games with the image in a way that lets you let off steam without getting more letters. If you're careful.
Fact is, the law states that the Uni is in the right here. So rub them through the mud. If this site was useful to students, then this is nothing but great publicity for the site now - use the short time you have to register something else and publicise it, and go from there.
Just don't get caught up on a losing battle over a name that you can't win. It doesn't matter if it is a dumb rule, it happens to be law. Make them not want to enforce it instead of just plain losing.
> Microsoft released yesterday a whole bunch of critical security updates.
Their new policy is to release monthly updates unless an exploit already exists, in which case a patch is immediately released.
How, exactly, are you contradicting the author?
> Of course a firewall will offer some protection but shouldn't be relied on
You don't know what you're talking about, submitter Dynamoo. Please, tell us why one shouldn't rely on a firewall? If you read the technical documentation about the flaw you see "If users have blocked the NetBIOS ports (ports 137-139) - and UDP broadcast packets using a firewall, others will not be able to send messages to them on those ports." (under "Technical Descriptions"). I think I'll ignore your advice and keep a firewall in place, no matter what OS I'm using.
I don't believe the author is telling you to remove your firewall. The author is saying that it shouldn't be relied upon. There is a significant difference. Because some other machine behind the same firewall might become infected, a firewall is not a perfect measure for protecting against this attack. There's a well worn phrase for this problem - "crunchy on the outside, chewey on the inside."
So, again, please explain how Another rabid submitter gets it wrong?
I can't speak to the parent poster's point, because I am not that person, but I can say that yes indeed, once Lindows and the Mozilla Foundation start dominating the industry and putting others out of business, I will be the first to cry foul.
And btw, integrating the browser with the OS [this particular OS] *makes sense*. Similar to KDE the file browser/explorer re-uses the codebase as the web browser.
You know, I just don't see it. Color me out of touch. File management and display of structured documents don't seem to me to be a natural combination. I *know* everyone seems to think it makes sense, and to some limited degree knowledge of a file's contents makes sense in a file manager, but browsing? I don't get it. It might as well have been integrated Gopher.
-j
I am anti Microsoft, but that's only because they make my life so hard for such little gain.
Everyone knows they should be running Alphas.
(Sure, can be that something else was important, etc. But failure to manage business systems as a pattern is grounds for replacement.)
Caveats aside, there is a serious difference between developers and admins. You appear to have a problem with the difference. To quote:
How can 4 weeks be considered a reasonable amount of time to fix a bug and issue a patch when IT people who merely DEPLOY the frick'in patch complain that 4 weeks isn't enough time to deploy a patch?
Well, for starters, the people producing the patch have many, many more engineers than your average small business. They also sold the software in question, which at least hints at what it should do, and when it doesn't hints at how the producer should, if it wants to preserve a good faith, behave. See, when a company sells software for a given function, they tend to be asserting that they have some idea about the area they're covering.
On the other hand, Admins have to run around waving hands not only for dumb things, but whenever a patch is released. One can say "Oh, just patch". Try that in a plucky small business context.
Sorry. Point is, don't assume that admins can patch as soon as something is released. Many times, you can't. Sometimes, you won't. Conflating engineering time with admin time is silly.
--A former admin, thank dog I'm not doing that now.
Organic blogs... I'm getting images that somehow combine Futurama's Nixon's head with stone age grunters worshipping a big rock.
Yes. 'clob' and 'texta' are other fun variants. I was thinking of more organic behaviours. "Wetware", the scifi book, came to mind.
Although in theory I like the idea of starting a blob, I'm not quite sure what is involved in doing so or what the eventual outcome would be, so I can't really enjoin you to start one.
I'm not a Democrat. I like some actions Democrats support. I'm not a Republican. I'm actually really pissed off at all the stupid shit they're doing right now in the name of political advantage at the cost of any ideals one might have had. I'm not a Libertarian. My message is, you can all bite me.
I am a small government type, maybe no government type, and what I see is that the Republicans are the new tax and spend queens. Just look at how much they're bleeding future tax money.
Given that you're happy on this level of discourse, perhaps this will make some sense: you're a dumb shit.
Happy? Now everyone's conversing on the same level.
Um, what was it that you had to say?
If you have more scorn with which to trash a cool artist whom happened to be awarded a private grant, go nuts. I'm sure you'd feel so much anger if you were awarded such an honor. Oh, wait, you never will be, because you're nothing but a sniper. So, you can happily feel scorn for the people you never can be.
I'd feel sad for you, but damn, you make it hard to be charitable. Fucking do something. Don't be a jerk.
Don't be a moron. Teachers are clearly paid the amount that equals how the US society values them, modulo union and elected politician interference.
If teachers want more money, they should make a better case for paying them better. One of the best cases to make is to stop teaching and do something else that pays what they deserve.
I'm about as anti-bush as one can be. I can't wait until he's voted out and replaced by a Democrat.
Assuming people who don't feel for the teachers are all "neocon, big business puppets" is not only wrong, but shows how limited your own political world is.
Have fun in that little cage.
Yes, I'm well aware of that - I've had a mild form happen to me (someone got enough info to open two credit cards, and I caught it quickly - it wasn't as bad as it could have been).
In Germany for example medical records are not allowed to be kept for more than 5 years (bit me in the ass a while ago when I tried to get some results from some years back), here? Nobody cares.
This has nothing to do with a national ID.
On the other hand an ID card etc. in North America IS a lot more scary because the government / private companies never ever seem to get rid of the data they have collected, that is the problem, not the ID card(s).
Which is exactly why I object so strongly to having a national ID. All it would do is make life easier for snoops, identity thieves, and meddlesome government. There is no benefit to the citizen, and plenty of downsides.
Most of what you cite is convenience. It may be convenient to have one card for everything, but that doesn't mean making it mandatory is a good idea. Identity theft can be stopped in other ways, and it isn't even clear to me that a national ID card would do much to stop it here at all.
The US started differently than European nations, and has a long history of distrust of the government. I still believe this is a valuble thing.
The only party getting value out of national ID cards is the government. Why should I quietly give that to them? I have no reason to.
For those of us who know we don't have the facts straight, could you enlighten us on how much a many is?
A service might be a money spinner, but is a risky gambit here.