With the way the updates have been lately that isn't a good thing. With Android 9 Google broke Bluetooth, fast charging on the Pixel XL, wrecked battery life, accidentally changed battery settings for apps, and numerous other problems. Android 8 was constantly a battle of them breaking Bluetooth every other week. At this point I think half the reason the other manufacturer's hold back on the updates is because Google tends to release them haphazardly and break stuff.
He may have stepped down because he was simply fed up with all the social justice behavior and the attacks on him for not being nice. Effective forcing a see how well you do without Linus situation.
We all know the kind of people that move in loathe to give up power and absolutely would never want him back. He might have more power and control now because he's demonstrated that the project needs him and has shown people who takes over if he leaves.
I'll let those people take over again is a pretty big gun he can now pull.
I disagree here. Netflix's system is a recommendation engine and not a rating engine. Yes, you are correct that a lot of morons misuse the 5 star system, only voting 1 or 5. However, a lot of people also use stuff n the middle. I think for recommendations you could get away with three levels.
0-2 can all be summarized as bad/didn't like. For recommendations, I don't see a lot of value in differentiating between complete garbage and bad stuff I don't want to watch. That could all be boiled down into thumbs down.
However, 3-5 has more granularity than just liking something. There are things I like and will watch, but am not too excited about. Then there are things I really liked and I would like actively recommended to me. I think you need at least thumbs up and two thumbs up for this.
This seems like it is going to result in even shittier recommendations.
Those attempting to enforce the law will always end up regarding rules of conduct and rights as an inconvenience that needs to go away. It makes their job harder. That's why you always need groups pushing back on them to keep such rules and rights in place.
You seem to completely misunderstand why this is bad. It relies entirely on Arena.net's judgement of what violates the "spirit" of the game. Where is the line. Yes, this did damage to the economy and Arena.net should do everything they can to limit and repair that damage. However, if making money in unexpected manners is a bannable offense where is the line? What about the Forge runs in GW1? What about finding a slightly good deal?
This just encourages a nanny culture where players report each other because they feel some "retard" isn't playing the game right and arbitrary bans. What Arena.net actually needs are tools and safeguards to limit the damage events like this can cause. I've seen other MMOs ban people for idiotic things such as standing on top of buildings due to this attitude.
I am willing to bet a good deal of it goes on. Allow a trader to engage in activity you claim you don't participate in, if he gets caught then you play the rogue trader card. It just massively backfired this time.
HP doesn't really have an engineering department anymore. Carly Fiorina fired them and spun off all the people who knew how to make stuff into Agilent. All downhill after her.
but is it my responsibility to suggest they change the password? especially since a 'professional' it outsourcing company took it over?
The problem is 'suggesting they changed the password' is proof that although you no longer work for them, you tried using your credentials to regain access to their system.
If they are dicks, they might call up the police and press charges for unauthorized access to their computer system,
even if you think you're just trying to be helpful, testing to make sure your creds are no longer valid.
This! In this case, suggesting they fix can do nothing good for you and they can potentially try to have you prosecuted for unauthorized access. You know you were fired, the letter proves you know that you aren't supposed to be able to access the systems, and it also proves you accessed the system. They won't have an epiphany and hire you back if you point out security flaws, in fact it is more likely they will shoot the messenger. Best case you get a thanks from a company that thinks IT is overpaid and screwed you over. Worst case they attempt to make your life miserable.
Furthermore, if you still have access, how many other holes are still sitting around their network? Who else still has access? They don't need a letter helping them plug up a single hole, they need someone like you fixing their security, which ironically they don't have anymore.
You forget, you don't actually have to build a PC to play their games. Most of the games are available on console and actually look better on console than OnLive. So you can fork out $200-300 and just buy an X360 or PS3 and be able to play 90% of their library and tons of games they don't have.
I think the biggest hurdle OnLive has is the changing PC marketplace. It used to be PC was the only place you could play shooters and had tons of big exclusives. Now all the mainstream games go cross platform and many PC games are ports from console. The exclusives for PC tends to be big strategy games like Civ and Total War or inde games (which usually have very reasonable system requirements and pricing.)
So that's yet another reason OnLive was a bad idea.
Problem is a lot of these diseases were unheard of due to the vaccinations, thus people forget about them and see them as a non-threat. They don't think chance X vs chance Y, they think "Autism, I don't want my kid to have that" and don't think about the diseases the vaccinations prevent. You want people to start thinking that vaccinations are mandatory again, you need prominent news story about how horrible these diseases are and how sad it is to watch kids die from them.
Banks make a lot of money, they have access to security. Medical marijuana isn't necessarily very profitable. In some states, it is illegal for them to sell their product and they may only donate it. Many growers do it as hobbyists for little or no profit. It is much easier to rob a marijuana grower than a bank. Furthermore, other businesses are not legally forced to publicly disclose their location. They do so because it is good for business.
If you asked for books on those subject shortly before someone near you was murdered by one of those methods, yes, the police would be interested in that. Remember, the article has "and other incriminating evidence" mentioned. Does searching for poison when someone close to you was poisoned mean you are guilty, no. Does it make you a suspect, definitely.
You have to remember, it isn't his router. Verizon provides the router with fios installations. So you are borrowing their router and usually paying a small rental fee. I imagine the legality is set-up so they can access it.
A lot of sites can become collateral damage. Ads on the internet tend to be obnoxious and the solution tends to be implementing an ad-blocker. This usually is active on all sites by default and comes with a set of filters the block everything on most sites. A lot of people wouldn't mind reasonable ads on sites they enjoy, but they don't tend to think about the ad blocking once it is in place. If you have reasonable ads, politely asking viewers to white list your site somehow seems like a good move.
I think a lot of people are looking at this the wrong way. It seems to be optional. I know many people run ad-blocking software with their browsers due to all the obnoxious banner ads and flash ads floating about the net these days. Many of these people use filter sets that are provided by someone else. This could work quite well if Microsoft allowed the users to have custom filter sets and was easily turned off. If implemented the wrong way, yes it could be ridiculously obnoxious. At the same time if implemented properly it could be a nice feature. Worst case other web development teams can steal the idea and implemented it well if Microsoft doesn't.
This isn't about paying more for a premium service. This is more like going to McDonalds, purchasing a drink for 99 cents and finding out to get the straw you have to pay an additional 10 cents. They are charging a ridiculous amount of money for an extremely trivial thing. This isn't a pack of skins, new areas, or a set of new weapon skins. This is about charging $2.50 for two game skins. People are calling them out on how stupid and insane that price is. It it were a pack of say 50-100 high quality skins I could see possibly a dollar or two for it.
If that McDonalds combo meal cost $50 instead of $2.50 I am willing to bet you would tell them they were crazy, greedy people too.
The overall thing people are saying is that it is fine to charge for content. Just make your content worthwhile and reasonable. This set of skins is clearly neither.
My brother and a few friends were huge Diablo II players. Getting a CD-key or password out of a Diablo II player is rather easy. They actually fall for it when someone spams "Check out these awesome hacks at (or get awesome free items ect.) : [website here]" in a lobby.
It is actually less about stealing the CD-key though and more about stealing the account password so they can take the items the player had and then sell them over e-bay for cash. It is actually a pretty big problem over Diablo II.
Usually they would install a trojan or keylogger through a browser (internet explorer) exploit. It is actually kind of interesting, Diablo II has its own little cybercrime community. There are plenty of players who fall for simple social engineering too.
Blizzard's customer service tends to be shaky at best, however you can get a new CD-key. Blizzard has a system in place to deal with stolen CD-keys. Treat this as a situation where you CD-key was stolen or non-functional. Do not tell them anything about wanting to transfer ownership of a CD-key. Keep it simple and tell them only what they need to know. Blizzard honestly doesn't care about what their EULA or packaging says. They do things their way and if the package promised something that wasn't in the game they will tell you tough luck.
#1) I recently purchased a copy of World of Warcraft #2) When I try to sign up for an account the CD-key says it is already used #3) I have the original CD-case with the CD-key sticker on it and read on your site I can mail them in to get a new CD-key
Remember the Diablo II players are famous for their acts of stupidity. They regularly get their CD-keys and accounts stolen. So if you just play the dumb "It says someone else has my CD-key and I don't know why" and then cite their CD-key replacement policy they should do it for you. If they tell you to return it to the store just tell them "the store doesn't take returns" and "it was the only copy I could find."
You may not be too keen on deceit, but honestly this is the only way blizzard will do anything. While they are fine about jerking around people who buy used copies of the game they will be much less eager to screw over someone who they think bought a new copy of the game that doesn't work.
More information about the process: http://www.blizzard.com/support/?id=aall 0641p
Keep in mind many of the negative side effects are not caused by the nicotine itself, but how it is absorbed. Yes, smoking isn't good for you. However if significant research says nicotine can help in some situations ways to take it without the negative side effects of smoking can be developed.
When you can no longer rely on the law to protect your privacy the time comes to take things into your own hands. Should this get applied to the internet I see a rather good reason to push for the encryption of all transmitted data.
While it is true people do attempt to justify piracy, I don't think people are demonizing the RIAA just because they want to download music. The RIAA has done a lot of nasty things. Keep in mind the RIAA has been convicted of racketeering, the regularly screw over the artists, and actively intimidate people. I am really not stretching things when I say the RIAA exists to screw people over in order to make more money.
Secondly, I don't buy the "If you have nothing to hide then what are you worrying about" arguement. People do abuse power and privacy is important. I didn't use kazaa myself (spyware infested crap, plus I really don't listen to much that comes out through the RIAA anymore), but I would rather not have people looking through what purchases I have made in the past month, what books I read, or who I called. I prefer to keep some degree of privacy.
The issue with Kazaa recording its users actions is that they were to a degree deceiving their users. I am posting a message, it is understood that slashdot has to record my message so that others can read it. However it would be different if slashdot was compiling a list of every article I read and every link I followed and keeping it somewhere.
I disagree, in this case I think it would constitute negligence on the Bank's part. To verify this it would have cost them a phone call and 15 minutes. The damage done was $90,000. That is the very definition of negligence.
The article says he had to take out a $30,000 loan and put up $20,000 of his own to keep the company afloat. This means that $90,000 was probably a significant portion if not all of the account. A credit card company definately would have flagged this and called to verify it right away.
This is more akin to you entrusting your car to valet and coming back to find he gave your car away to the wrong person.
He probably should have had anti-virus and better protected himself, but the bank definately should have noticed something was up in this case.
If I recall wasn't the two fiber thing (and really most of Leviticus) one of the things the new testament said basically "Yeah, don't listen to that anymore."
I think this is going to be a legal grey area for a while. While this seems kind of foolish look at the opposite end of the spectrum. What happens if a site deep links to child porn? The site is hosting none of the illegal content itself. However the content displays on the page is made readily available. On the same boat you could deep link to something on my page and for revenge I can replace it with something like child porn. Thus in these cases I think the mental state of the defendant is extremely important.
I agree they would have been better going after the sites themselves. This solves no problems for them and is really more of a harassment lawsuit. However the ability to prosecute for linking may be necessary sometime.
Slashdot Mirror
With the way the updates have been lately that isn't a good thing. With Android 9 Google broke Bluetooth, fast charging on the Pixel XL, wrecked battery life, accidentally changed battery settings for apps, and numerous other problems. Android 8 was constantly a battle of them breaking Bluetooth every other week. At this point I think half the reason the other manufacturer's hold back on the updates is because Google tends to release them haphazardly and break stuff.
He may have stepped down because he was simply fed up with all the social justice behavior and the attacks on him for not being nice. Effective forcing a see how well you do without Linus situation.
We all know the kind of people that move in loathe to give up power and absolutely would never want him back. He might have more power and control now because he's demonstrated that the project needs him and has shown people who takes over if he leaves.
I'll let those people take over again is a pretty big gun he can now pull.
I disagree here. Netflix's system is a recommendation engine and not a rating engine. Yes, you are correct that a lot of morons misuse the 5 star system, only voting 1 or 5. However, a lot of people also use stuff n the middle. I think for recommendations you could get away with three levels.
0-2 can all be summarized as bad/didn't like. For recommendations, I don't see a lot of value in differentiating between complete garbage and bad stuff I don't want to watch. That could all be boiled down into thumbs down.
However, 3-5 has more granularity than just liking something. There are things I like and will watch, but am not too excited about. Then there are things I really liked and I would like actively recommended to me. I think you need at least thumbs up and two thumbs up for this.
This seems like it is going to result in even shittier recommendations.
Those attempting to enforce the law will always end up regarding rules of conduct and rights as an inconvenience that needs to go away. It makes their job harder. That's why you always need groups pushing back on them to keep such rules and rights in place.
You seem to completely misunderstand why this is bad. It relies entirely on Arena.net's judgement of what violates the "spirit" of the game. Where is the line. Yes, this did damage to the economy and Arena.net should do everything they can to limit and repair that damage. However, if making money in unexpected manners is a bannable offense where is the line? What about the Forge runs in GW1? What about finding a slightly good deal? This just encourages a nanny culture where players report each other because they feel some "retard" isn't playing the game right and arbitrary bans. What Arena.net actually needs are tools and safeguards to limit the damage events like this can cause. I've seen other MMOs ban people for idiotic things such as standing on top of buildings due to this attitude.
I am willing to bet a good deal of it goes on. Allow a trader to engage in activity you claim you don't participate in, if he gets caught then you play the rogue trader card. It just massively backfired this time.
HP doesn't really have an engineering department anymore. Carly Fiorina fired them and spun off all the people who knew how to make stuff into Agilent. All downhill after her.
but is it my responsibility to suggest they change the password? especially since a 'professional' it outsourcing company took it over?
The problem is 'suggesting they changed the password' is proof that although you no longer work for them, you tried using your credentials to regain access to their system.
If they are dicks, they might call up the police and press charges for unauthorized access to their computer system, even if you think you're just trying to be helpful, testing to make sure your creds are no longer valid.
This! In this case, suggesting they fix can do nothing good for you and they can potentially try to have you prosecuted for unauthorized access. You know you were fired, the letter proves you know that you aren't supposed to be able to access the systems, and it also proves you accessed the system. They won't have an epiphany and hire you back if you point out security flaws, in fact it is more likely they will shoot the messenger. Best case you get a thanks from a company that thinks IT is overpaid and screwed you over. Worst case they attempt to make your life miserable. Furthermore, if you still have access, how many other holes are still sitting around their network? Who else still has access? They don't need a letter helping them plug up a single hole, they need someone like you fixing their security, which ironically they don't have anymore.
You forget, you don't actually have to build a PC to play their games. Most of the games are available on console and actually look better on console than OnLive. So you can fork out $200-300 and just buy an X360 or PS3 and be able to play 90% of their library and tons of games they don't have. I think the biggest hurdle OnLive has is the changing PC marketplace. It used to be PC was the only place you could play shooters and had tons of big exclusives. Now all the mainstream games go cross platform and many PC games are ports from console. The exclusives for PC tends to be big strategy games like Civ and Total War or inde games (which usually have very reasonable system requirements and pricing.) So that's yet another reason OnLive was a bad idea.
There are other options than Norton and McAfee, Kaspersky can be good in a smaller business.
Problem is a lot of these diseases were unheard of due to the vaccinations, thus people forget about them and see them as a non-threat. They don't think chance X vs chance Y, they think "Autism, I don't want my kid to have that" and don't think about the diseases the vaccinations prevent. You want people to start thinking that vaccinations are mandatory again, you need prominent news story about how horrible these diseases are and how sad it is to watch kids die from them.
Banks make a lot of money, they have access to security. Medical marijuana isn't necessarily very profitable. In some states, it is illegal for them to sell their product and they may only donate it. Many growers do it as hobbyists for little or no profit. It is much easier to rob a marijuana grower than a bank. Furthermore, other businesses are not legally forced to publicly disclose their location. They do so because it is good for business.
If you asked for books on those subject shortly before someone near you was murdered by one of those methods, yes, the police would be interested in that. Remember, the article has "and other incriminating evidence" mentioned. Does searching for poison when someone close to you was poisoned mean you are guilty, no. Does it make you a suspect, definitely.
You have to remember, it isn't his router. Verizon provides the router with fios installations. So you are borrowing their router and usually paying a small rental fee. I imagine the legality is set-up so they can access it.
A lot of sites can become collateral damage. Ads on the internet tend to be obnoxious and the solution tends to be implementing an ad-blocker. This usually is active on all sites by default and comes with a set of filters the block everything on most sites. A lot of people wouldn't mind reasonable ads on sites they enjoy, but they don't tend to think about the ad blocking once it is in place. If you have reasonable ads, politely asking viewers to white list your site somehow seems like a good move.
I think a lot of people are looking at this the wrong way. It seems to be optional. I know many people run ad-blocking software with their browsers due to all the obnoxious banner ads and flash ads floating about the net these days. Many of these people use filter sets that are provided by someone else. This could work quite well if Microsoft allowed the users to have custom filter sets and was easily turned off. If implemented the wrong way, yes it could be ridiculously obnoxious. At the same time if implemented properly it could be a nice feature. Worst case other web development teams can steal the idea and implemented it well if Microsoft doesn't.
This isn't about paying more for a premium service. This is more like going to McDonalds, purchasing a drink for 99 cents and finding out to get the straw you have to pay an additional 10 cents. They are charging a ridiculous amount of money for an extremely trivial thing. This isn't a pack of skins, new areas, or a set of new weapon skins. This is about charging $2.50 for two game skins. People are calling them out on how stupid and insane that price is. It it were a pack of say 50-100 high quality skins I could see possibly a dollar or two for it. If that McDonalds combo meal cost $50 instead of $2.50 I am willing to bet you would tell them they were crazy, greedy people too. The overall thing people are saying is that it is fine to charge for content. Just make your content worthwhile and reasonable. This set of skins is clearly neither.
My brother and a few friends were huge Diablo II players. Getting a CD-key or password out of a Diablo II player is rather easy. They actually fall for it when someone spams "Check out these awesome hacks at (or get awesome free items ect.) : [website here]" in a lobby.
It is actually less about stealing the CD-key though and more about stealing the account password so they can take the items the player had and then sell them over e-bay for cash. It is actually a pretty big problem over Diablo II.
Usually they would install a trojan or keylogger through a browser (internet explorer) exploit. It is actually kind of interesting, Diablo II has its own little cybercrime community. There are plenty of players who fall for simple social engineering too.
Blizzard's customer service tends to be shaky at best, however you can get a new CD-key. Blizzard has a system in place to deal with stolen CD-keys. Treat this as a situation where you CD-key was stolen or non-functional. Do not tell them anything about wanting to transfer ownership of a CD-key. Keep it simple and tell them only what they need to know. Blizzard honestly doesn't care about what their EULA or packaging says. They do things their way and if the package promised something that wasn't in the game they will tell you tough luck.
l 0641p
#1) I recently purchased a copy of World of Warcraft
#2) When I try to sign up for an account the CD-key says it is already used
#3) I have the original CD-case with the CD-key sticker on it and read on your site I can mail them in to get a new CD-key
Remember the Diablo II players are famous for their acts of stupidity. They regularly get their CD-keys and accounts stolen. So if you just play the dumb "It says someone else has my CD-key and I don't know why" and then cite their CD-key replacement policy they should do it for you. If they tell you to return it to the store just tell them "the store doesn't take returns" and "it was the only copy I could find."
You may not be too keen on deceit, but honestly this is the only way blizzard will do anything. While they are fine about jerking around people who buy used copies of the game they will be much less eager to screw over someone who they think bought a new copy of the game that doesn't work.
More information about the process:
http://www.blizzard.com/support/?id=aal
Keep in mind many of the negative side effects are not caused by the nicotine itself, but how it is absorbed. Yes, smoking isn't good for you. However if significant research says nicotine can help in some situations ways to take it without the negative side effects of smoking can be developed.
When you can no longer rely on the law to protect your privacy the time comes to take things into your own hands. Should this get applied to the internet I see a rather good reason to push for the encryption of all transmitted data.
While it is true people do attempt to justify piracy, I don't think people are demonizing the RIAA just because they want to download music. The RIAA has done a lot of nasty things. Keep in mind the RIAA has been convicted of racketeering, the regularly screw over the artists, and actively intimidate people. I am really not stretching things when I say the RIAA exists to screw people over in order to make more money.
Secondly, I don't buy the "If you have nothing to hide then what are you worrying about" arguement. People do abuse power and privacy is important. I didn't use kazaa myself (spyware infested crap, plus I really don't listen to much that comes out through the RIAA anymore), but I would rather not have people looking through what purchases I have made in the past month, what books I read, or who I called. I prefer to keep some degree of privacy.
The issue with Kazaa recording its users actions is that they were to a degree deceiving their users. I am posting a message, it is understood that slashdot has to record my message so that others can read it. However it would be different if slashdot was compiling a list of every article I read and every link I followed and keeping it somewhere.
I disagree, in this case I think it would constitute negligence on the Bank's part. To verify this it would have cost them a phone call and 15 minutes. The damage done was $90,000. That is the very definition of negligence.
The article says he had to take out a $30,000 loan and put up $20,000 of his own to keep the company afloat. This means that $90,000 was probably a significant portion if not all of the account. A credit card company definately would have flagged this and called to verify it right away.
This is more akin to you entrusting your car to valet and coming back to find he gave your car away to the wrong person.
He probably should have had anti-virus and better protected himself, but the bank definately should have noticed something was up in this case.
If I recall wasn't the two fiber thing (and really most of Leviticus) one of the things the new testament said basically "Yeah, don't listen to that anymore."
I think this is going to be a legal grey area for a while. While this seems kind of foolish look at the opposite end of the spectrum. What happens if a site deep links to child porn? The site is hosting none of the illegal content itself. However the content displays on the page is made readily available. On the same boat you could deep link to something on my page and for revenge I can replace it with something like child porn. Thus in these cases I think the mental state of the defendant is extremely important.
I agree they would have been better going after the sites themselves. This solves no problems for them and is really more of a harassment lawsuit. However the ability to prosecute for linking may be necessary sometime.