Can you point to the line where the GP claimed it was a criminal matter? He didn't.
He said it was illegal, which regardless of your beliefs, it is.
The University's job is to do whatever it feels is right. Apparently it is doing just that. You're free to disagree, of course, but that doesn't make them wrong and you right.
I'm curious. Tell me, what part of "due process" has been stomped upon when someone accuses you of an illegal activity, and the university, as an intermediary, forwards you their accusation?
Hahaha. Fuck me, that's funny. You start comparing California and Washington based on, uhh, what? Then you admit you haven't the first idea how UW is funded and THEIR budgetary breakdown, but eh, near enough is good enough, so it's "probably the same". You're not pre-law, by any chance?
You pay for the bandwidth? Sure. And if you paid for the bandwidth, guess what, they'd ask your upstream. I'm failing to see your so-called point.
Wow. I'm impressed. I work for one of the world's largest IT companies and we have rigid WiFi policies, and WiFi available everywhere, and apparently we're doing it wrong, we're incompetent.
Let me break it down for you. We have three separate WiFi networks: for the corp network, for authenticated guests, and 'free internet'. To get on the corp. network you need to first log in via a wired connection and get a client cert. At the same time, network enforced policy will configure your connectivity to the network, first preference WPA2, then WPA. You'll also be configured so that IPSEC is mandatory on all LAN connections.
But apparently we should have WiFi turned off, because our way is insecure.
If you are not a SEx member, how the hell can they be collecting fees for your copyrighted works if they hold no copyright on your works? Something about this systems seems a bit screwed up.
That's the payoff that comes from being able to afford lobbying. This money, which isn't yours, gets channeled to you and unless someone pays a fee to you to be able to collect their money from you, you get to keep it. Win win! You can finance more lobbying, off of the backs of people who may disagree with your entire viewpoint, hence one possible reason why they're indy.
and if that is the case, how well other carriers' networks work with iPhone (obviously sans things like Visual Voicemail).
Why would it function any differently (sans VVM)? Contrary to the spin, there are no modifications to the network to magically do anything for the iPhone in this regard. It's a GSM device.
What/will/ be interesting is whether the phone is tri-band/quad-band, etc, so whether it is even usable outside the US.
Was everyone? Huh? Where? This is the first time I've heard any such query. Interestingly, in the T-mobile store the activation process took a good two-and-a-half to three minutes for my phone.
Greater good? That's a good way to spin it. How about we be a little more objective and say "for your vested interests"? Kinda changes the question, and the answer.
Guess what? Contrary to what the Ivys would have you believe, in most fields "what school did you go to" doesn't matter. Sure, if you went to Cal Tech it helps if you're into Robotics, Yale if you're looking at Law, but for the very very vast majority of employers, your Bachelor of [degree] is what matters, not "My alma mater is Ivy League Blah" (unless, of course, your alma mater is University of Phoenix...).
And even for those fields where your school might be considered - that's almost certainly only as a graduate. Get one job that you last in more than a year and your school will become a moot point.
To quote Good Will Hunting, "You wasted $150,000 on an education you could have got for a buck fifty in late charges at a public library."
Oh, well that's alright then - though I'm pretty sure people would pay more attention to "YOUR BANK ACCOUNT AND CREDIT CARD DETAILS WILL BE LOGGED" than "EVERYTHING IS LOGGED".
And hey, not to worry about security, after all, you don't, because, y'know, it all seems pretty secure. Especially for a logging system that captures credit card data. Who'd want to expend energy breaking into that?
I moved to the US 6 months ago, bringing my Australian phone. T-mobile were happy to sell me a SIM card, and add it to an existing contract account. No issues, no complaints, no cajoling necessary.
Desktop search is not new, yet Microsoft did not allow for a preferred search facility which disabled their builtin search.
Any application installer can disable the builtin search. This was discussed extensively previously - "GDS has noted that Indexing Service is on, and this will hamper performance. Would you like to disable?" Seems pretty straightforward. After all, the hooks to disable Indexing Service are publicly available and work.
Or should the WDS facility seek out other Desktop Search apps and disable itself if it finds something running? No. If you mean "Search" on the Start Menu, that's fairly encroaching. What next? Should the entirety of the OS be extensible? (Well, it should, but you know what I mean) Should there be an integral API allowing anyone to hook anything into anything? Filesystem? Maybe a competitor could release a new kernel for Vista, should that be allowed to hook into the UI?
They must all competitors to compete.
Show me how GDS is prevented from running? Oh, it's impeded from running at full performance? Guess what, so is Indexing Service. GDS is a user's choice to install? Guess what, the user can also uninstall Indexing Service. That Google have chosen to seek (questionable) legal redress for what is clearly a simple issue to resolve (and one that DEFINITELY would have come up in any usability testing) speaks volumes.
To me, it only looks like it's forcing Microsoft to obey anti-trust laws and provide a means for competitors to play in the desktop search market instead of harming others by making it look like the competitors software is massively slowing down the OS by having two indexing systems.
FUD. For one, it doesn't slow down the OS per se. It slows down the indexing system of two separate applications. GDS and Indexing Service. MS isn't spinning it to say "GDS is slowing down your OS, get rid of it". It's simple resourcing.
IMO, Microsoft should be required to take Vista off the market until this is fixed. They are doing exactly what they've done for years in regards to harming competition on the Windows OS monopoly and they are currently still under sanctions from previous illegal anti-trust actions.
Off the market? Pardon me while I cry with laughter. Harming competition? I guess you mean by putting in an unremovable, un-disable-able indexing service that slows down a competitors desktop search app. Except, what's that, oh, yes, it IS removable, by USER or by EXPOSED API. And it is disable-able, by USER or by EXPOSED API. Remind me again how you think this should be dealt with.
I was going to say "most phones have net access, and I've not seen this functionality, for any number of reasons". Then I recalled that my SE K790 does allow OTA firmware upgrades.
To damage competing tech/ products? Huh? The product was easily disabled. Google's complaint, as it is, was that it "wasn't easily disabled enough" (not sure what they were looking for, a Big Red Button on the desktop, or more likely, something that sits in the bowels of Add / Remove Windows Components, not installed by default, so people think that functionality is missing from Windows, and so download GDS) and that it "slowed GDS down" (well, yes, two programs indexing the hard drive will have to share access to it. I'm confused as to why this is MS's problem - you'll note that Windows Desktop Search is equally impaired - actually, even less, because it yields to everything including GDS, whereas GDS won't yield to Windows Desktop Search - this is a fairly understandable concept) - again, not sure what Google's preferred course was for MS, "invent a hard drive indexing routine that doesn't need to read the hard drive" (now that WOULD be innovation).
This is one I'm disappointed MS caved on. Google is doing little more than using the court to proactively hurt competitors, something most people here are usually against.
That's TF. Apple wants to bring some features that have really only been offered to business users, to everyone else... at some later point then they can back that support into exchange - if they need to.
Huh? Every consumer phone I've used for the last two years+ has supported IMAP IDLE or other push stuff, and most of them are not even smartphones.
Wow, on one hand you detail all these fantastic features of Blackberry, and then you poopoo Windows Mobile as "can do some form of live mail", when it can do all those things, WITHOUT the addon BES: you have the mail infrastructure with Exchange, configure it. Remote wipe? Sure. Password enforcement? Sure. I'm not sure why you seem to think ActiveSync to a Windows Mobile device is unpredictable and unreliable, but I am curious.
Sure, I can run Pocket IE or Opera 9 on my HTC Wizard. Both support zooming. Both support CSS, JS, Flash. Both rotate (although not based on screen orientation, but by opening the keyboard, which is habitual when using the device in landscape).
Slashdot Mirror
Miami could be on it, possibly Seattle (but I don't think so, living in Seattle - though it'd be close, definitely top 20).
He said it was illegal, which regardless of your beliefs, it is.
The University's job is to do whatever it feels is right. Apparently it is doing just that. You're free to disagree, of course, but that doesn't make them wrong and you right.
I really am quite curious.
You pay for the bandwidth? Sure. And if you paid for the bandwidth, guess what, they'd ask your upstream. I'm failing to see your so-called point.
Let me break it down for you. We have three separate WiFi networks: for the corp network, for authenticated guests, and 'free internet'. To get on the corp. network you need to first log in via a wired connection and get a client cert. At the same time, network enforced policy will configure your connectivity to the network, first preference WPA2, then WPA. You'll also be configured so that IPSEC is mandatory on all LAN connections.
But apparently we should have WiFi turned off, because our way is insecure.
Or your logical absolute isn't really.
That's the payoff that comes from being able to afford lobbying. This money, which isn't yours, gets channeled to you and unless someone pays a fee to you to be able to collect their money from you, you get to keep it. Win win! You can finance more lobbying, off of the backs of people who may disagree with your entire viewpoint, hence one possible reason why they're indy.
Gotta love how it all works, huh?
(in no particular order) ... Comments?
You jest, but they are. As are most of Saddam's dead "henchmen". Go figure.
Why would it function any differently (sans VVM)? Contrary to the spin, there are no modifications to the network to magically do anything for the iPhone in this regard. It's a GSM device.
What /will/ be interesting is whether the phone is tri-band/quad-band, etc, so whether it is even usable outside the US.
No, one cannot. Wherever you buy the phone, you're tied into at least a two, effectively a five year contract with AT&T. Lucky you.
Was everyone? Huh? Where? This is the first time I've heard any such query. Interestingly, in the T-mobile store the activation process took a good two-and-a-half to three minutes for my phone.
Greater good? That's a good way to spin it. How about we be a little more objective and say "for your vested interests"? Kinda changes the question, and the answer.
Northwestern?
And even for those fields where your school might be considered - that's almost certainly only as a graduate. Get one job that you last in more than a year and your school will become a moot point.
To quote Good Will Hunting, "You wasted $150,000 on an education you could have got for a buck fifty in late charges at a public library."
And hey, not to worry about security, after all, you don't, because, y'know, it all seems pretty secure. Especially for a logging system that captures credit card data. Who'd want to expend energy breaking into that?
You're able to add 3.6TB of diskspace every month for $1200? Can you point me to your HDD supplier?
I moved to the US 6 months ago, bringing my Australian phone. T-mobile were happy to sell me a SIM card, and add it to an existing contract account. No issues, no complaints, no cajoling necessary.
Any application installer can disable the builtin search. This was discussed extensively previously - "GDS has noted that Indexing Service is on, and this will hamper performance. Would you like to disable?" Seems pretty straightforward. After all, the hooks to disable Indexing Service are publicly available and work.
Or should the WDS facility seek out other Desktop Search apps and disable itself if it finds something running? No. If you mean "Search" on the Start Menu, that's fairly encroaching. What next? Should the entirety of the OS be extensible? (Well, it should, but you know what I mean) Should there be an integral API allowing anyone to hook anything into anything? Filesystem? Maybe a competitor could release a new kernel for Vista, should that be allowed to hook into the UI?
Show me how GDS is prevented from running? Oh, it's impeded from running at full performance? Guess what, so is Indexing Service. GDS is a user's choice to install? Guess what, the user can also uninstall Indexing Service. That Google have chosen to seek (questionable) legal redress for what is clearly a simple issue to resolve (and one that DEFINITELY would have come up in any usability testing) speaks volumes.
FUD. For one, it doesn't slow down the OS per se. It slows down the indexing system of two separate applications. GDS and Indexing Service. MS isn't spinning it to say "GDS is slowing down your OS, get rid of it". It's simple resourcing.
Off the market? Pardon me while I cry with laughter. Harming competition? I guess you mean by putting in an unremovable, un-disable-able indexing service that slows down a competitors desktop search app. Except, what's that, oh, yes, it IS removable, by USER or by EXPOSED API. And it is disable-able, by USER or by EXPOSED API. Remind me again how you think this should be dealt with.
I was going to say "most phones have net access, and I've not seen this functionality, for any number of reasons". Then I recalled that my SE K790 does allow OTA firmware upgrades.
This is one I'm disappointed MS caved on. Google is doing little more than using the court to proactively hurt competitors, something most people here are usually against.
I'd read about Yahoo Mail after I replied to this. No Gmail, though.
Huh? Every consumer phone I've used for the last two years+ has supported IMAP IDLE or other push stuff, and most of them are not even smartphones.
Wow, on one hand you detail all these fantastic features of Blackberry, and then you poopoo Windows Mobile as "can do some form of live mail", when it can do all those things, WITHOUT the addon BES: you have the mail infrastructure with Exchange, configure it. Remote wipe? Sure. Password enforcement? Sure. I'm not sure why you seem to think ActiveSync to a Windows Mobile device is unpredictable and unreliable, but I am curious.
Does that help?
The corollary to that is that perfection in usability decreases with removal of function (as opposed to functionality).