The difference is that HBGary tried to dox random people. They dug up some names they believed to be "members" of Anonymous and then tried to gain the FBI's attention which they knew were on a crusade against Anonymous. And considering previous cases chances are the life of the people named by HBGary would have become quite miserable.
BTW: Anonymous does not care much about consistency or reputation or what slashdotters might think of them.
Many people may think that Lego has nothing to do with IT or even technology in general. I think what happens when a child plays with Lego is the very core of what hacking means - being creative and constructive.
Uh, and of course most of the things you can build with Lego can be portet to Minecraft;-).
I suppose almost noone from countries other than Germany know about Wolfgang Schaeuble, his policy and what he stands for. But for German nerds it's bad news and stuff that matters. Among many other law and order topics he is trying to push forward he tries to get a law passed that would allow prosecuters to hack private computers.
That could possibly be acceptable if police hackers would need a proper warrant, the number of infilitrations was very low, the general public would get to know about these numbers and last but not least the observed subject would be informed afterwards. Experience with telephone wiretapping in Germany tells us that none of these democratic requirements are taken seriously.
Additionally, there are reserveations against the software that would be used as it is sure to open security holes for other malware.
This is basically what Wolfgang Schaeuble stands for among the German linux community and I can absolutely understand that many fellow nerds do not want to support a LinuxTag in any way that is somehow associated with Schaeuble. I for one don't welcome our new trojan dropping overlord.
I figure the fun in this "game" highly depends on how much you are able to actually control a camera to take a look at the piece of environment you want to observe. So what will the user-to-camera ratio be like? 1,000?
It is not policemen watching monitors anymore but increasingly image recognition software that can track subjects and even analyzes behaviour. Take the field of view of all cameras in London combined plus lots of image recognition and you have the equivalent of 100 policemen for every block. I would not feel comfortable under that kind of surveillance. Because cameras are less conspicious people tend to accept surveillance in this form rather than running into a bobby every few steps.
The other day, I dicovered wireless iPod headphones.
Really no offense intended but with a little common sense you could have known that such a product is very propable to exist. The technology exists and so is a demand for iPod-related gadgets. What you really did not know was that you needed it, otherwise you would have looked for it before seeing that ad.
This is rather a confirmation of my theory: The ad did not provide any information you did not have already, but manipulated you into wanting something you don't need. Oh, and what was the brand again, I need one of those, too.;-)
Ads serves two purposes: Make you aware of a product and convince/manipulate you to buy it. They try to convince you by giving you information about key features, but we all know these information must be taken with a pinch of salt. They often exagerate positive features and leave out negative ones. There are much better places to look for product information than ads, i.e. the Web.
From from a consumer's point of view there is only one desirable aspect of ads: Learning that a product for a certain purpose exists. But if somebody misses anything, would he not go and search for the information himself? Again, the information is right there in the Net.
I have no interest in any ads whatsoever. I like my product information pulled by myself, not pushed by doubleclick, mediaplex or webmasterplan.
As far as I see it, there is a possible vicious circle.
linux distros do not include proprietary drivers.
The lack of full hardware support hinders linux popularity.
Not much pressure on hardware manufacturers to develop linux drivers.
Rinse, repeat
On the other hand, if distributions do use proprietary drivers for linux, that may be the beginning of the end of pure open source distributions which is bad in the long run.
Not an easy one but I tend to favour using proprietary drivers rather than being stuck with bad/no drivers.
Sometime in the not-too-distant future you're going to discover why people have sharable calendars.
Oh I do already, but I would not benefit from having one today.
But the real point is: if I did benefit from having a sharable calendar, I would still not entrust this data to any John Doe. I would setup my own online calendar. Ad-free, spyware-free, free of charge (already have web space), flexible.
None of them. Calendar entries are by definition personal and I do not trust any company enough, especially ones that offer the service without charge. It would be different if calendar entries were stored in encrypted form (which would require a client, but that could be done with JavaScript, too).
Before you call me paranoid: Personal user data gets abused a lot and besides I really have done well without an online calendar until now, so there is no real need to use one for me.
Sony created a technology that was not accepted by the movie industry, because they had the need for media with longer play times. Sure, Betamax exceeded VHS in most aspects, but not in this essential one. And this is where I have to admit that "better" is not that straightforward as I made it look.
"and make sure people learn that" --> Sony marketed but was too late, and also did not open its formats (open formats, firefox & w3c, sound familiar?).
A headstart is a big advantage so it is not enough to be a tiny bit better and louder than the competitor. You'll have to be a whole lot better and louder. Still, being good and loud is eventually all that counts. Uhm, make that good, loud and unexpensive.
Try setting up a delivery and courier service at the domain fredex.com and see how far you get, even if you name is Fred Ex...
Where did you get my... oh, never mind *whistle*.
I agree I would not get far. Still I refuse to accept the combination of greedy brand owners and stupid web users to be a sane basis for domain jurisdiction. First come first serve would be totally ok if I was to decide.
Mike Rowe has all right to own and use a domain named mikerowe.com, more than Microsoft has at least. Heck, more than Microsoft has to use microsoft.com. Again, certain priviledges seem to be a matter of money, not only in some corrupt dictatorships but also in the western world.
how is MS going to determine the legitimate misspellings from the illegitimate misspellings?
If I was a data miner like M$, I would maintain a whitelist and have every browser connect to my servers on a regular basis to update that whitelist. I would not be a bit surprised if it worked like this. Of course, a personalized subscription to this service would be even better.
In closed source software it is not always easy to determine the quality of the underlying code. With Symantec stuff it's different. Every single one of them behaves strange, unexpected and/or different to standard conforming windows programs. Plus you get the usual bunch of auto-update-inform-me-spam-subscription options with defaults all wrong. I don't like their products, not a bit. I'm talking about PcAnywhere, Internet Security and Ghost.
> Amazing how they seem to be doing everything possible to get people to hate them.
It is the other way round: Once nobody likes you because you pissed off basically everybody in the target group, you don't care anymore about image and can do business nobody in their right mind would do otherwise.
Slashdot Mirror
The difference is that HBGary tried to dox random people. They dug up some names they believed to be "members" of Anonymous and then tried to gain the FBI's attention which they knew were on a crusade against Anonymous. And considering previous cases chances are the life of the people named by HBGary would have become quite miserable. BTW: Anonymous does not care much about consistency or reputation or what slashdotters might think of them.
Wanted to do that for a long time now.
Many people may think that Lego has nothing to do with IT or even technology in general. I think what happens when a child plays with Lego is the very core of what hacking means - being creative and constructive. Uh, and of course most of the things you can build with Lego can be portet to Minecraft ;-).
In fact, a simple regular expression matching "der" or "mit" would be a better test for legitimate mail than Thunderbird's crappy heuristics.
That could possibly be acceptable if police hackers would need a proper warrant, the number of infilitrations was very low, the general public would get to know about these numbers and last but not least the observed subject would be informed afterwards. Experience with telephone wiretapping in Germany tells us that none of these democratic requirements are taken seriously.
Additionally, there are reserveations against the software that would be used as it is sure to open security holes for other malware.
This is basically what Wolfgang Schaeuble stands for among the German linux community and I can absolutely understand that many fellow nerds do not want to support a LinuxTag in any way that is somehow associated with Schaeuble. I for one don't welcome our new trojan dropping overlord.
I figure the fun in this "game" highly depends on how much you are able to actually control a camera to take a look at the piece of environment you want to observe. So what will the user-to-camera ratio be like? 1,000?
So are Europeans more geeky oder just better informed than US peeps?
It is not policemen watching monitors anymore but increasingly image recognition software that can track subjects and even analyzes behaviour. Take the field of view of all cameras in London combined plus lots of image recognition and you have the equivalent of 100 policemen for every block. I would not feel comfortable under that kind of surveillance. Because cameras are less conspicious people tend to accept surveillance in this form rather than running into a bobby every few steps.
Really no offense intended but with a little common sense you could have known that such a product is very propable to exist. The technology exists and so is a demand for iPod-related gadgets. What you really did not know was that you needed it, otherwise you would have looked for it before seeing that ad.
This is rather a confirmation of my theory: The ad did not provide any information you did not have already, but manipulated you into wanting something you don't need. Oh, and what was the brand again, I need one of those, too. ;-)
Ads serves two purposes: Make you aware of a product and convince/manipulate you to buy it. They try to convince you by giving you information about key features, but we all know these information must be taken with a pinch of salt. They often exagerate positive features and leave out negative ones. There are much better places to look for product information than ads, i.e. the Web.
From from a consumer's point of view there is only one desirable aspect of ads: Learning that a product for a certain purpose exists. But if somebody misses anything, would he not go and search for the information himself? Again, the information is right there in the Net.
I have no interest in any ads whatsoever. I like my product information pulled by myself, not pushed by doubleclick, mediaplex or webmasterplan.
On the other hand, if distributions do use proprietary drivers for linux, that may be the beginning of the end of pure open source distributions which is bad in the long run.
Not an easy one but I tend to favour using proprietary drivers rather than being stuck with bad/no drivers.
But the real point is: if I did benefit from having a sharable calendar, I would still not entrust this data to any John Doe. I would setup my own online calendar. Ad-free, spyware-free, free of charge (already have web space), flexible.
Be better than the competition and make sure people learn that.
Simple as that.
I agree I would not get far. Still I refuse to accept the combination of greedy brand owners and stupid web users to be a sane basis for domain jurisdiction. First come first serve would be totally ok if I was to decide.
Mike Rowe has all right to own and use a domain named mikerowe.com, more than Microsoft has at least. Heck, more than Microsoft has to use microsoft.com. Again, certain priviledges seem to be a matter of money, not only in some corrupt dictatorships but also in the western world.
Stupid parents to have their son's name collide with phonetics of Microsoft.
In closed source software it is not always easy to determine the quality of the underlying code. With Symantec stuff it's different. Every single one of them behaves strange, unexpected and/or different to standard conforming windows programs. Plus you get the usual bunch of auto-update-inform-me-spam-subscription options with defaults all wrong. I don't like their products, not a bit. I'm talking about PcAnywhere, Internet Security and Ghost.
I guess this is not going to be a game for us geeky folk.