Really, now. Because the following quote, from "ShieldW0lf", uid 601553 on http://slashdot.org/ seems to convey his intent to murder the individual referenced. I have a feeling that individual is Jason Fortuny.
No, he didn't, he conveyed no intent, I was going to say he conveyed a desire, but he didn't even do that. He expressed an opinion that he believed he would feel no remorse.
Imperfection in use of language, especially that with legal meaning, not a wise thing.
Alright, so all he has to do is show that he NEVER so much as researched his program on-site, NEVER fixed a bug on-site as a result of the beta testing, NEVER asked anyone for suggestions for his program on-site, NEVER promoted or advertised his product on-site, and he's fine then. "Especially if it's not something that the employer already does" is not even remotely relevant - he wrote a replacement for the HR program it was his job to maintain.
He just saw this as a get-rich-quick scheme, and presumed he could score off the contract, by getting it into place under the guise of it being something he'd developed for them, with a timebomb of "Oh, and if you don't pay $X to Third Party Company Z, this software will stop working."
I think when you look at the off-site, on-site distinction, this guy is gonna fall flat on his ass. Especially after it was deployed in beta format in his unit, is he going to try to claim, with a straight face, that he did zero work on it on-site?
That's because CACert isn't trusted by Mozilla. CACert's verification procedures aren't trusted by Microsoft. Or me.
And that's what's wrong:
GoDaddy's procedures are "you typed in an arbitrary name and address, and the billing ZIP you entered matched the billing ZIP on the credit card you paid for when we billed you, so here you are.
Saying that "You can't afford this, should I trust you?" in situations like the above are solving the wrong problem.
Or perhaps I should also exercise my right to bear arms and start firing high-powered rifle shots randomly around the city? I'm sure there's no chance at all I'll ever hit someone.
I know. You could use the high powered rifle to shoot drivers you deem to be a risk to you, and move the "proactive protection" the other guy is whining about from the government to you!
Anywhere in Europe and a lot of South America? For a start.
In Europe, it's common on most all beaches for girls as young as thirteen to sunbathe topless, and no-one thinks anything of it.
On the contrary here in the US, I saw of all things a beer ad the other night with some guy covering up someone sunbathing topless and making a remark about "how they're a little different from us". Only here is there active pride in our prudishness.
I think that 'steadfastly refusing to allow ANYONE any access to the administration of a system that is no longer your responsibility to maintain, and indeed you are no longer permitted access to, based solely on your subjective belief that they are incapable of running it to a standard of security you think worthy' causes more 'harm' than otherwise.
Huh? What? It's not his network. He's not some kind of hero. Yeah, there are other idiots in the world, but seriously, anyone seeing Childs as some kind of champion of security is sadly, sorely mistaken.
Uhhh, they tried to obtain Scrabulous, but couldn't come to an arrangement. And
settle out of court in a way that the brothers aren't pissed off
I don't know about you, but when I get into a situation with someone that seemingly can only be resolved by me SUING them, whether they're pissed off or not about it is quite frankly fairly far down on a list of the things I care about.
Yeah, I had to laugh at this, what a fucking joke. "We are moving from building SSDs for primarily digital cameras which, less face it, have pretty low IO requirements, other than burst write rates on higher megapixel models, to computers using them as their primary drives with heavy read-write IO. Accordingly, we're going to blame the fact that our hardware wasn't designed for such a thing on the fact that OSes may perform heavy read/write".
What a travesty.
"We didn't make as much profit because SSDs are with every passing day becoming more and more of a commodity, and due to the fact that we make products on the higher end of the market than the $10/gb K-mart crap (i.e. Ultra and Extreme product lines)". Far more accurate.
Slashdot isn't much better, "Ooh, look, `nother chance to slap Vista for max page views and ad revenue, jump on it!"
AWESOME! What a deal. I bought a hard drive with my laptop that I don't use, because I can't specify no hard drive, and I bought some memory chips with my laptop (at, let's face it, Apple's EXTORTIONATE memory pricing), and they can gather dust alongside that hard drive, because Apple's default memory configurations are to fill the bays so any upgrade means some or all of your existing memory is redundant.
Wow. Sign me up for a world where this is so blithely acceptable, if indeed people aren't mocked for accepting it as "The Apple Way(TM)".
It's a good and very valid point. I don't necessarily agree with the morals of such, but it's akin to an employee who is fired for theft of office equipment suing for wrongful dismissal because another employee got a formal warning. There is a discretionary principle in place. That being said, it can expect a cash judgment because it is entitled to such, and to impose a monetary fine upon itself is nonsensical.
Bear in mind that the damages are the limit of Viacom's recompense. That Google may choose to dismiss employees for doing this (and exposing them to liability) is purely between Google and its employees, and isn't redress in and of itself for the wrong. Of course Viacom could try to "settle" by suggesting Google dismiss said employees rather than face judgment (I am, of course, working on a definite assumption that there is an issue of substance here), but I doubt it (would be far too open a road for said employees to sue Viacom for tortious interference, whereby a party induces another party to break a contract with a third party).
Not a whole lot, provided Viacom could show they disciplined said employees upon discovery. Which may well be as a result of access to the log files provided by Google. So essentially Viacom would have to be monumentally stupid (and I know a lot of people think they and any other MPAA/RIAA affiliate are, but still) not to have a look at said log files and say "Hey, you and you, here's a warning/termination letter".
Very true. In fact, it's exactly what I said above. All Viacom would need to do would be to show that they took action against their own employees doing the same thing, and there would be no bad faith involved in the law's eyes.
If you have a router that can either use DD-WRT, or has something along the lines of (probably in advanced settings) "Connection Timeouts", or similar to what I'm saying, that'll reduce the problem, if not eliminate it. DD-WRT isn't immune either, it just has a far more sane default (sometimes the default can be up to a week. Alternatively, connection limiting in a Torrent client will have the same effect.
What? No it's not. Since when ever has "But they do it too!" been a defense in a court of law?
It only means that Viacom could, should, take appropriate actions against their employees. Given that they're claiming the employer has liability, there's no point suing themselves, but just taking disciplinary action against their employees, perhaps termination, would be sufficient. After all, it's exactly what you'll find Google doing, if there are employees identified as a result.
So they're looking for Google employees doing the uploading, at Google (as determined by IP addresses).
If someone's employee goes above and beyond the call of duty to help you, that reflects on them as a company.
If the employee screws you over, that reflects on them as a company. Say a middle manager denies you your refund on a defective product. Now, to listen to several people above, "What problem is it of the store's that the manager ignored consumer protection laws?" - should the manager be sued or personally liable? Of course you'd go after the company.
If you get screwed by an employee out of their mandate (say, copying your credit card number down, something clearly not in their job description), you still don't go after the person. You'd be suing their employer for the actions of their employee on the job. Vicarious liability. (Of course, the employee would also be guilty of criminal charges.) Any loss inflicted on the company would either be picked up by civil suit between employer and employee or professional insurance, etc.
Ummm, that's not an AIM thing. "Concatenated SMS" is actually a part of the standard, and allows you to send (theoretically) 255 chained messages, although most phones do not support more than 6 or 8 (around a thousand characters).
And I've on the flip side interviewed for PHP web developer positions where the applicants have outright turned/us/ down with only a couple of years experience (at most, some are college grads) because, gasp, we weren't paying $75/hr full-time.
There are definite excesses on both sides of the scale.
Most often, actually, I've found that the cause is, gasp, Bittorrent. Fills up the NAT tables and they're not purged fast enough, unable to open / map more ports, effectively, no more connectivity.
If you need / want to without installing a third party solution, there is an "easy" way to do it (undocumented, unintuitive, I admit). Pause where you want the frame to be. Display Control Panel... turn Hardware Acceleration off. Take screenshot. Put it back on, resume playback.:)
Check Control Panel > Sounds > Recording - the mixer, as you noted, is only for playback. But you can indeed have multiple recording devices, and they all have individual levels, AGC, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
No, he didn't, he conveyed no intent, I was going to say he conveyed a desire, but he didn't even do that. He expressed an opinion that he believed he would feel no remorse.
Imperfection in use of language, especially that with legal meaning, not a wise thing.
He just saw this as a get-rich-quick scheme, and presumed he could score off the contract, by getting it into place under the guise of it being something he'd developed for them, with a timebomb of "Oh, and if you don't pay $X to Third Party Company Z, this software will stop working."
I think when you look at the off-site, on-site distinction, this guy is gonna fall flat on his ass. Especially after it was deployed in beta format in his unit, is he going to try to claim, with a straight face, that he did zero work on it on-site?
And actually, Nokia sells more phones than the number of iPhones out there every 3 days.
And that's what's wrong:
GoDaddy's procedures are "you typed in an arbitrary name and address, and the billing ZIP you entered matched the billing ZIP on the credit card you paid for when we billed you, so here you are.
Saying that "You can't afford this, should I trust you?" in situations like the above are solving the wrong problem.
I know. You could use the high powered rifle to shoot drivers you deem to be a risk to you, and move the "proactive protection" the other guy is whining about from the government to you!
St Vincent's Hospital in Melbourne, Australia, has a ward called the Aikenhead Wing.
Idiot.
In Europe, it's common on most all beaches for girls as young as thirteen to sunbathe topless, and no-one thinks anything of it.
On the contrary here in the US, I saw of all things a beer ad the other night with some guy covering up someone sunbathing topless and making a remark about "how they're a little different from us". Only here is there active pride in our prudishness.
Everyone's a bad ass mother fucker on the Internet, right?
I think that 'steadfastly refusing to allow ANYONE any access to the administration of a system that is no longer your responsibility to maintain, and indeed you are no longer permitted access to, based solely on your subjective belief that they are incapable of running it to a standard of security you think worthy' causes more 'harm' than otherwise.
Huh? What? It's not his network. He's not some kind of hero. Yeah, there are other idiots in the world, but seriously, anyone seeing Childs as some kind of champion of security is sadly, sorely mistaken.
I don't know about you, but when I get into a situation with someone that seemingly can only be resolved by me SUING them, whether they're pissed off or not about it is quite frankly fairly far down on a list of the things I care about.
What a travesty.
"We didn't make as much profit because SSDs are with every passing day becoming more and more of a commodity, and due to the fact that we make products on the higher end of the market than the $10/gb K-mart crap (i.e. Ultra and Extreme product lines)". Far more accurate.
Slashdot isn't much better, "Ooh, look, `nother chance to slap Vista for max page views and ad revenue, jump on it!"
Wow. Sign me up for a world where this is so blithely acceptable, if indeed people aren't mocked for accepting it as "The Apple Way(TM)".
Ye gods.
Bear in mind that the damages are the limit of Viacom's recompense. That Google may choose to dismiss employees for doing this (and exposing them to liability) is purely between Google and its employees, and isn't redress in and of itself for the wrong. Of course Viacom could try to "settle" by suggesting Google dismiss said employees rather than face judgment (I am, of course, working on a definite assumption that there is an issue of substance here), but I doubt it (would be far too open a road for said employees to sue Viacom for tortious interference, whereby a party induces another party to break a contract with a third party).
Not a whole lot, provided Viacom could show they disciplined said employees upon discovery. Which may well be as a result of access to the log files provided by Google. So essentially Viacom would have to be monumentally stupid (and I know a lot of people think they and any other MPAA/RIAA affiliate are, but still) not to have a look at said log files and say "Hey, you and you, here's a warning/termination letter".
Very true. In fact, it's exactly what I said above. All Viacom would need to do would be to show that they took action against their own employees doing the same thing, and there would be no bad faith involved in the law's eyes.
If you have a router that can either use DD-WRT, or has something along the lines of (probably in advanced settings) "Connection Timeouts", or similar to what I'm saying, that'll reduce the problem, if not eliminate it. DD-WRT isn't immune either, it just has a far more sane default (sometimes the default can be up to a week. Alternatively, connection limiting in a Torrent client will have the same effect.
It only means that Viacom could, should, take appropriate actions against their employees. Given that they're claiming the employer has liability, there's no point suing themselves, but just taking disciplinary action against their employees, perhaps termination, would be sufficient. After all, it's exactly what you'll find Google doing, if there are employees identified as a result.
If someone's employee goes above and beyond the call of duty to help you, that reflects on them as a company.
If the employee screws you over, that reflects on them as a company. Say a middle manager denies you your refund on a defective product. Now, to listen to several people above, "What problem is it of the store's that the manager ignored consumer protection laws?" - should the manager be sued or personally liable? Of course you'd go after the company.
If you get screwed by an employee out of their mandate (say, copying your credit card number down, something clearly not in their job description), you still don't go after the person. You'd be suing their employer for the actions of their employee on the job. Vicarious liability. (Of course, the employee would also be guilty of criminal charges.) Any loss inflicted on the company would either be picked up by civil suit between employer and employee or professional insurance, etc.
Why would this be any different?
Ummm, that's not an AIM thing. "Concatenated SMS" is actually a part of the standard, and allows you to send (theoretically) 255 chained messages, although most phones do not support more than 6 or 8 (around a thousand characters).
There are definite excesses on both sides of the scale.
Most often, actually, I've found that the cause is, gasp, Bittorrent. Fills up the NAT tables and they're not purged fast enough, unable to open / map more ports, effectively, no more connectivity.
If you need / want to without installing a third party solution, there is an "easy" way to do it (undocumented, unintuitive, I admit). Pause where you want the frame to be. Display Control Panel... turn Hardware Acceleration off. Take screenshot. Put it back on, resume playback. :)
Check Control Panel > Sounds > Recording - the mixer, as you noted, is only for playback. But you can indeed have multiple recording devices, and they all have individual levels, AGC, etc.