Too bad you got modded off-topic. You might actually have a point. This would probably not be a problem at the Calgary and Pasadena offices (where smoking rates are tiny), but in the rest of the world there's still plenty of smoke breaks, and most of these guys have to go outside to do it. I guess they are world-wide, so it's certainly possible that they have some campus that is not smoke-free somewhere.
In sooper-seekrit environments, they don't allow any paper out. No cell phones, and certainly no cameras. So if you want to be a mole, you have to have a very good memory. Of course you hear stories of low-level workers walking out the door with nuclear secrets and stuff all the time. So there's clearly plenty of security lacking. Without physical security, any amount of cyber-security is just a waste of money.
The OP was asking if there were open source programs that can do this. I can't think of any.
As for not printing out things for convenience, I can't think of many industries that would consider that sort of inflexibility to be a feature. If my shop loses electrical power, I still want them to be able to work from hard copies. Diesel backup for the air compressor and welding machine, and they're good to go until the sun goes down. No need to rely on a computer for the drawings, because they have hard copies. Now if they ever come out with a D-sized or even B-size Kindle, that might work. But only if they make it resistant to weld spatter. One more thing: If you run over a paper drawing with a forklift, you still have a usable document.
Is the OP actually suggesting that companies that make drawings actually lock down their CAD files à la FairPlay? "You've got this part in three open assemblies. No more instances for you!" or "Sorry, it's been five days since you downloaded this part file, and we haven't seen a PO from you. This file will no longer open." That would be pretty damn stupid. Most of time I spend on the Internet is looking for a vendor's CAD file of a part to put in one of my assembly drawings. Hell, half the time I pick a vendor based on how good their online parts database is. If I can't copy it into my assembly, and know that it will work in the future, what good is it to me?
Honestly, who would need this for CAD files? I can understand encryption to make sure competition doesn't get a hold of trade secret files, but you wouldn't be sharing those with your customer anyway. Once a CAD file is shared with your customer, you assume he's gonna try and farm it out to the lowest bidder. That's why you don't hand out production drawings, just GAs and the like.
I've had to take the grinding wheel and cutting torch to a few components from companies without parts libraries. I hope we don't ever get back to the sorry state where that was the norm. CTSBTFPTM, I think it was. Cut to size, beat to fit, paint to match. Something like that.
He mentions PDFs and Office files, too. I've seen companies do this before. They'll send a quote in PDF thinking that it's somehow more secure. If I wanted to forge a lower quote, I would just do it. A "protected" PDF isn't going to stop me. There's always the analog hole for things that can be printed out. OCR has gotten pretty reliable these days at recreating documents. If it can't be printed out, it can still be copied on screen or even have the file "hacked" into.
Really the only possible reason I can see a company wanting this is not to keep their customers out, but to lock out former employees. I just can't figure how you'd be able to do that. If somebody knew they were leaving, they'd still be able to exploit any analog holes while they still had legit access.
I was told just yesterday that Jacobs Engineering powers down workstations every night. I don't know if it's just the Calgary office that does this or if it's a worldwide policy. My contact said that under special conditions people can get exceptions, like if they're running a detailed render or fetching a large query.
He said the plan is to tie it into building security eventually. If you haven't scanned your ID tag on the way in, it won't let you start up your machine. Then on the way out, if your machine is still on it'll turn it off. Just don't forget to save before you go outside for a smoke break!
Actually, David Ritz is an anti-spam vigilante, who is being sued by Jerry Reynolds who appears to be a Usenet spammer, and sues* spam-fighters. Though you're right that the court documents make it sound like David's the bad guy.
*Looks like the guy on this site is a co-defendant with David Ritz, so maybe not the most reliable source.
In order to use ECFS, you must have Netscape Navigator 4.0 or higher or Microsoft Internet Explorer 4.0 or higher. Netscape Navigator is recommended and preferred because of its reliability.
The first thing I thought of when I saw this was how nice it would have been to have in 2005 (see item #3 in the article). Somehow, nobody predicted that telling the people of Galveston that there was a storm headed their way and they should evacuate would cause mass hysteria and evacuation of just about all of Harris County (as far as 80 miles from the coast). As many of you remember, the results were terrible. More people died on the road than by the hurricane itself.
With proper modeling of urban panic, the authorities would have known the trade-offs a little better, and they could have prepared a little better. Maybe they would have known to block the on-ramps north of town. Of course, models are only as good as the data they're based on, and there's not much data to base some of their objectives on. Nevertheless, it will be interesting to see what policymakers can do with the information.
I've used un-scrubbed corporate app inputs to my advantage. At GE, we had two databases that didn't talk to each other. At all. We had to manually enter the data from one into the other line by line (why they paid engineers to do such mindless work is beyond me, maybe it's because we were on salary). Eventually, I figured out that the second database didn't get rid of things like HTML tags from the company front end app. So instead of entering the data line by line in the second database (which nobody ever used, except to print one form), I just wrote a script that output the appropriate HMTL table from the first database, and just pasted that into the "Comments" section of the second database. The result was a form that looked exactly like one that was entered line by line, but it took about two hours less to do it. It printed out fine, so none of the PHBs cared / knew the difference. Also, my method allowed people to do useful stuff like link to equipment data sheets and embed Goatse pictures before they resigned.
I don't understand what the hubbub is all about. I have been through the list of edits from that IP address, and the vast majority of them are constructive edits with NPOV. The editor appears to be a Star Trek and Star Wars fan from Beeville, TX with a hankering for cartoons. The only thing that stands out is the systematic removal of detainee numbers, but there's probably an obvious non-sinister reason. Perhaps detainees don't actually have numbers, or those aren't the right numbers. This all seems a little blown out of proportion. I'd like to point out that the Castro edit was reverted in less that three minutes. It is common for new Wikipedians to not understand that their edits take effect right away, so they'll "test" like that and fix it later or it gets reverted by others.
I'm curious, why wouldn't you want a nuclear reactor in your back yard? I really wouldn't have any problem with them building one nearby (though maybe not my back yard, since it's quite small). As long as it was state-of-the-art, the odds of it having a problem that would damage me or my property would be pretty slim. I'm much more likely to die of an asthma attack triggered by the particulate matter spewed into the atmosphere by our current coal power plants. So as long as they use the nuclear plant to replace, rather than supplement, current forms of production, I'm all for it.
Reminds me of the bit in America: The Book where they show the progression of the name of the Congo and how it related to the odds of dying there. "The Congo" was just an oppressive place to live, but "The Smiling, Happy People's Democratic Republic of Congo" had a danger level just north of an atomic fireball. Don't have the book here to get the exact quote.
There are plenty of 12 mo toys that are interesting enough to keep my 9 mo son entertained and engaged for more than five minutes. Of course, he's just as happy smacking around a can of soup or chewing on the sofa. So maybe his standards are a little low.
According to the blog comments it's just a problem with Finder (Apple+drag); using the mv command does not exhibit the bug. I don't have my Mac handy, so I can't verify.
Excellent idea. If there were a Bible game true to the book, I'm sure it would be rated at least M. Think about it; fratricide, genocide, rape, murder, torture, suicide, arson, fornication, animal sacrifice, etc. are all in there, especially in the Old Testament. In fact, sometimes it's the protagonist perpetrating the acts.
I actually don't consider McVeigh a terrorist, since his target was a government building. I don't think he's a hero or a patriot, but I don't think terrorist is the right word. He didn't even try to shoot the cop that arrested him.
I think the reason the government has been able to get more political capital out of the 9/11 attacks was because it was easy to frame it as an us-versus-them sort of thing. With McVeigh, he was "one of us" or "home-grown," so it was harder for them to get everybody whipped up into a frenzy.
When we were embroiled in a patent dispute a while back, I convinced my boss that Slashdot was a forum for discussing patent issues. So now I can read it whenever I want. Oddly, I still tend to do my Slashdotting during lunch.
I don't think it's ridiculous to ask that somebody using and publishing something that I created to credit me. That's my right as a copyright holder. As a contributor to the Creative Commons, I think it is imperative for artists to receive proper recognition for their work. Believe it or not, it takes a lot of time and effort to make music and visual works, and that effort needs to be rewarded.
If you don't get permission, just don't publish the video. If it truly is just a family/baby video, mark it private and share it with your friends and family only. You may not like the fact that you have to ask permission, but you do. Not only is it the law (except for fair use), it is the right thing to do. Even Weird Al asks permission, even though he doesn't have to. It's polite.
I've taken photographs and published them CC-BY-SA. Imagine my surprise when I found them on a commercial pipe organ database without attribution. It may seem like a trifle to you, but it's really offensive to me. I'm not even asking for money, and people still don't want to credit me. Is it too much to ask? Clamoring around an organ chamber with camera equipment is no small task. Why can't people at least give credit where it's due? I guess people think that because it's on the Internet, it's OK to take, use, and sell whatever they want.
What about the girl who found her self-portrait photograph* used on the cover of a pornographic movie? Oh, I guess it's just a series of photons, so the production company didn't need to ask her permission.
What the hell is happening to the world?
* I don't approve of this site's misuse of the word "theft."
Slashdot Mirror
Wasn't that the plot to Live Free or Die Hard?
Too bad you got modded off-topic. You might actually have a point. This would probably not be a problem at the Calgary and Pasadena offices (where smoking rates are tiny), but in the rest of the world there's still plenty of smoke breaks, and most of these guys have to go outside to do it. I guess they are world-wide, so it's certainly possible that they have some campus that is not smoke-free somewhere.
In sooper-seekrit environments, they don't allow any paper out. No cell phones, and certainly no cameras. So if you want to be a mole, you have to have a very good memory. Of course you hear stories of low-level workers walking out the door with nuclear secrets and stuff all the time. So there's clearly plenty of security lacking. Without physical security, any amount of cyber-security is just a waste of money.
As for not printing out things for convenience, I can't think of many industries that would consider that sort of inflexibility to be a feature. If my shop loses electrical power, I still want them to be able to work from hard copies. Diesel backup for the air compressor and welding machine, and they're good to go until the sun goes down. No need to rely on a computer for the drawings, because they have hard copies. Now if they ever come out with a D-sized or even B-size Kindle, that might work. But only if they make it resistant to weld spatter. One more thing: If you run over a paper drawing with a forklift, you still have a usable document.
Honestly, who would need this for CAD files? I can understand encryption to make sure competition doesn't get a hold of trade secret files, but you wouldn't be sharing those with your customer anyway. Once a CAD file is shared with your customer, you assume he's gonna try and farm it out to the lowest bidder. That's why you don't hand out production drawings, just GAs and the like.
I've had to take the grinding wheel and cutting torch to a few components from companies without parts libraries. I hope we don't ever get back to the sorry state where that was the norm. CTSBTFPTM, I think it was. Cut to size, beat to fit, paint to match. Something like that.
He mentions PDFs and Office files, too. I've seen companies do this before. They'll send a quote in PDF thinking that it's somehow more secure. If I wanted to forge a lower quote, I would just do it. A "protected" PDF isn't going to stop me. There's always the analog hole for things that can be printed out. OCR has gotten pretty reliable these days at recreating documents. If it can't be printed out, it can still be copied on screen or even have the file "hacked" into.
Really the only possible reason I can see a company wanting this is not to keep their customers out, but to lock out former employees. I just can't figure how you'd be able to do that. If somebody knew they were leaving, they'd still be able to exploit any analog holes while they still had legit access.
He said the plan is to tie it into building security eventually. If you haven't scanned your ID tag on the way in, it won't let you start up your machine. Then on the way out, if your machine is still on it'll turn it off. Just don't forget to save before you go outside for a smoke break!
*Looks like the guy on this site is a co-defendant with David Ritz, so maybe not the most reliable source.
With proper modeling of urban panic, the authorities would have known the trade-offs a little better, and they could have prepared a little better. Maybe they would have known to block the on-ramps north of town. Of course, models are only as good as the data they're based on, and there's not much data to base some of their objectives on. Nevertheless, it will be interesting to see what policymakers can do with the information.
I've used un-scrubbed corporate app inputs to my advantage. At GE, we had two databases that didn't talk to each other. At all. We had to manually enter the data from one into the other line by line (why they paid engineers to do such mindless work is beyond me, maybe it's because we were on salary). Eventually, I figured out that the second database didn't get rid of things like HTML tags from the company front end app. So instead of entering the data line by line in the second database (which nobody ever used, except to print one form), I just wrote a script that output the appropriate HMTL table from the first database, and just pasted that into the "Comments" section of the second database. The result was a form that looked exactly like one that was entered line by line, but it took about two hours less to do it. It printed out fine, so none of the PHBs cared / knew the difference. Also, my method allowed people to do useful stuff like link to equipment data sheets and embed Goatse pictures before they resigned.
What in the world are you talking about??
I don't understand what the hubbub is all about. I have been through the list of edits from that IP address, and the vast majority of them are constructive edits with NPOV. The editor appears to be a Star Trek and Star Wars fan from Beeville, TX with a hankering for cartoons. The only thing that stands out is the systematic removal of detainee numbers, but there's probably an obvious non-sinister reason. Perhaps detainees don't actually have numbers, or those aren't the right numbers. This all seems a little blown out of proportion. I'd like to point out that the Castro edit was reverted in less that three minutes. It is common for new Wikipedians to not understand that their edits take effect right away, so they'll "test" like that and fix it later or it gets reverted by others.
I'm curious, why wouldn't you want a nuclear reactor in your back yard? I really wouldn't have any problem with them building one nearby (though maybe not my back yard, since it's quite small). As long as it was state-of-the-art, the odds of it having a problem that would damage me or my property would be pretty slim. I'm much more likely to die of an asthma attack triggered by the particulate matter spewed into the atmosphere by our current coal power plants. So as long as they use the nuclear plant to replace, rather than supplement, current forms of production, I'm all for it.
Reminds me of the bit in America: The Book where they show the progression of the name of the Congo and how it related to the odds of dying there. "The Congo" was just an oppressive place to live, but "The Smiling, Happy People's Democratic Republic of Congo" had a danger level just north of an atomic fireball. Don't have the book here to get the exact quote.
Even more proof that Google is evil!!
Yeah, but they're "wrestling power from the carriers" not wresting it. That's totally different!!
There are plenty of 12 mo toys that are interesting enough to keep my 9 mo son entertained and engaged for more than five minutes. Of course, he's just as happy smacking around a can of soup or chewing on the sofa. So maybe his standards are a little low.
According to the blog comments it's just a problem with Finder (Apple+drag); using the mv command does not exhibit the bug. I don't have my Mac handy, so I can't verify.
Excellent idea. If there were a Bible game true to the book, I'm sure it would be rated at least M. Think about it; fratricide, genocide, rape, murder, torture, suicide, arson, fornication, animal sacrifice, etc. are all in there, especially in the Old Testament. In fact, sometimes it's the protagonist perpetrating the acts.
I think the reason the government has been able to get more political capital out of the 9/11 attacks was because it was easy to frame it as an us-versus-them sort of thing. With McVeigh, he was "one of us" or "home-grown," so it was harder for them to get everybody whipped up into a frenzy.
When we were embroiled in a patent dispute a while back, I convinced my boss that Slashdot was a forum for discussing patent issues. So now I can read it whenever I want. Oddly, I still tend to do my Slashdotting during lunch.
No, 911 is for emergencies only. The police department should have been called, but not via 911.
If you don't get permission, just don't publish the video. If it truly is just a family/baby video, mark it private and share it with your friends and family only. You may not like the fact that you have to ask permission, but you do. Not only is it the law (except for fair use), it is the right thing to do. Even Weird Al asks permission, even though he doesn't have to. It's polite.
I've taken photographs and published them CC-BY-SA. Imagine my surprise when I found them on a commercial pipe organ database without attribution. It may seem like a trifle to you, but it's really offensive to me. I'm not even asking for money, and people still don't want to credit me. Is it too much to ask? Clamoring around an organ chamber with camera equipment is no small task. Why can't people at least give credit where it's due? I guess people think that because it's on the Internet, it's OK to take, use, and sell whatever they want.
What about the girl who found her self-portrait photograph* used on the cover of a pornographic movie? Oh, I guess it's just a series of photons, so the production company didn't need to ask her permission.
What the hell is happening to the world?
* I don't approve of this site's misuse of the word "theft."