Q: Why can't I distribute my implementation in source code form? And why does Microsoft care about "other licenses?" A: The specifications used to create your protocol implementations are confidential and, along with the source code of those implementations, include Microsoft trade secrets. However, because other MCPP licensees have agreed to MCPP license terms (including distribution and confidentiality provisions), you can distribute the source code of your implementation to them. The license agreement also permits you to allow others to view the source code of your implementations on-site at your place of business for evaluation purposes, under suitable non-disclosure agreements.
In addition to not disclosing your source code directly (other than as just described), you also need to make sure not to subject your implementation to any other licenses that would require such source code disclosure. For example, under certain circumstances, other licenses may require your implementation to be disclosed in source code form when you distribute your implementation with other technology that is already subject to that other license. In short, you can't subject your authorized implementations to any license that requires you do things that are contrary to the scope of your license and your obligations under the license agreement.
The question based on google's policy should they not provide information to the DoJ, since it is a "enforceable governmental request" or are they questing that?
Google only shares personal information with other companies or individuals outside of Google in the following limited circumstances:
* We have your consent. We require opt-in consent for the sharing of any sensitive personal information.
* We provide such information to our subsidiaries, affiliated companies or other trusted businesses or persons for the purpose of processing personal information on our behalf. We require that these parties agree to process such information based on our instructions and in compliance with this Policy and any other appropriate confidentiality and security measures.
* We have a good faith belief that access, use, preservation or disclosure of such information is reasonably necessary to (a) satisfy any applicable law, regulation, legal process or enforceable governmental request, (b) enforce applicable Terms of Service, including investigation of potential violations thereof, (c) detect, prevent, or otherwise address fraud, security or technical issues, or (d) protect against imminent harm to the rights, property or safety of Google, its users or the public as required or permitted by law. http://www.google.com/intl/en/privacypolicy.html#i nformation/
As a 2004 ChemE grad, I would say the finding an engineering job in the spring of 2004 was not easy, especially for a new grad. I had several interviews. (I even had a company blow me off after an interview, only to have someone else from the same company send me an email about 4 months later say the wanted to interview me for a position that they had open.) I only had one job offer, but then again I had found a nice job about a month before school got out. I remember the classes of 2001 and 2002 where the grads said that they had 4 and 5 job offers.
The company I work for hired 3 grads (including me) in 2004 and they are thinking of hiring more. My company has an aging work force of engineers and will have to start hiring new engineers in the coming few year to replace them as they retire.
As I talk to 2005 grads from my college, they said that the job market was better than 2004. The demand for engineers follows the economy, some years are good, and others are bad.
Or go to their house (since you already got their mail) and open the telephone network box (little gray thing on the side of your house) plug a phone into the testing port. And there you have it, a way to gain access to someone's phone line. No breaking in required. Depending on where they live, this might actually be easy. If they are willing to commit a felony to get the mail, how much more is trespassing?
1) If the "hack" is really just editing a URL, I think that is stupid that some would get rejected for looking their own information (we have something like that at my college, a computer on campus accessed information from school computers (unrestricted) and posted the information from many computers in one place, access was restricted to on campus only!!! But the school still got pissed).
2) How would you even know that some looked at you information and got you rejected, assuming the school does not change its stance on this. Will HBS send out rejection letters saying that since you looked at you own personal information you will therefore be rejected you, thank you and have a nice day.
Not only was WAAS added to improve GPS accuracy, but a few years ago (~4) the US government also turned off "Selective Availability" which added noise to the time stamp from the satellites. SA purposely decreased the accuracy of the system.
Slashdot Mirror
Just EMP the entire would. Economics dictates that if there is no demand, can not be a shortage, problem fix...
And I quote...
o verview.aspx
Q: Why can't I distribute my implementation in source code form? And why does Microsoft care about "other licenses?"
A: The specifications used to create your protocol implementations are confidential and, along with the source code of those implementations, include Microsoft trade secrets. However, because other MCPP licensees have agreed to MCPP license terms (including distribution and confidentiality provisions), you can distribute the source code of your implementation to them. The license agreement also permits you to allow others to view the source code of your implementations on-site at your place of business for evaluation purposes, under suitable non-disclosure agreements.
In addition to not disclosing your source code directly (other than as just described), you also need to make sure not to subject your implementation to any other licenses that would require such source code disclosure. For example, under certain circumstances, other licenses may require your implementation to be disclosed in source code form when you distribute your implementation with other technology that is already subject to that other license. In short, you can't subject your authorized implementations to any license that requires you do things that are contrary to the scope of your license and your obligations under the license agreement.
http://members.microsoft.com/consent/info/License
The question based on google's policy should they not provide information to the DoJ, since it is a "enforceable governmental request" or are they questing that?
i nformation/
Google only shares personal information with other companies or individuals outside of Google in the following limited circumstances:
* We have your consent. We require opt-in consent for the sharing of any sensitive personal information.
* We provide such information to our subsidiaries, affiliated companies or other trusted businesses or persons for the purpose of processing personal information on our behalf. We require that these parties agree to process such information based on our instructions and in compliance with this Policy and any other appropriate confidentiality and security measures.
* We have a good faith belief that access, use, preservation or disclosure of such information is reasonably necessary to (a) satisfy any applicable law, regulation, legal process or enforceable governmental request, (b) enforce applicable Terms of Service, including investigation of potential violations thereof, (c) detect, prevent, or otherwise address fraud, security or technical issues, or (d) protect against imminent harm to the rights, property or safety of Google, its users or the public as required or permitted by law.
http://www.google.com/intl/en/privacypolicy.html#
As a 2004 ChemE grad, I would say the finding an engineering job in the spring of 2004 was not easy, especially for a new grad. I had several interviews. (I even had a company blow me off after an interview, only to have someone else from the same company send me an email about 4 months later say the wanted to interview me for a position that they had open.) I only had one job offer, but then again I had found a nice job about a month before school got out. I remember the classes of 2001 and 2002 where the grads said that they had 4 and 5 job offers. The company I work for hired 3 grads (including me) in 2004 and they are thinking of hiring more. My company has an aging work force of engineers and will have to start hiring new engineers in the coming few year to replace them as they retire. As I talk to 2005 grads from my college, they said that the job market was better than 2004. The demand for engineers follows the economy, some years are good, and others are bad.
No linux?
Or go to their house (since you already got their mail) and open the telephone network box (little gray thing on the side of your house) plug a phone into the testing port. And there you have it, a way to gain access to someone's phone line. No breaking in required. Depending on where they live, this might actually be easy. If they are willing to commit a felony to get the mail, how much more is trespassing?
And yes you can put locks on those boxes.
1) If the "hack" is really just editing a URL, I think that is stupid that some would get rejected for looking their own information (we have something like that at my college, a computer on campus accessed information from school computers (unrestricted) and posted the information from many computers in one place, access was restricted to on campus only!!! But the school still got pissed). 2) How would you even know that some looked at you information and got you rejected, assuming the school does not change its stance on this. Will HBS send out rejection letters saying that since you looked at you own personal information you will therefore be rejected you, thank you and have a nice day.
Not only was WAAS added to improve GPS accuracy, but a few years ago (~4) the US government also turned off "Selective Availability" which added noise to the time stamp from the satellites. SA purposely decreased the accuracy of the system.