...If the copyright notice on this free CD says that anyone can copy and distribute, that is a different matter alltogether.
I wonder if anyone would question that "shrink wrap" agreement? Of course they wouldn't - it would be granting additional rights to the user rather than stripping them away.
"Unexplained affluence, failing to report overseas travel, showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope, keeping unusual work hours, unreported contacts with foreign nationals, unreported contact with foreign government, military, or intelligence officials, attempting to gain new accesses without the need to know, and unexplained absences are all considered potential espionage indicators."
Wow, baring the military & intelligence stuff (which I really doubt anyone would be able to actually spot), that describes a typical grad student lifestyle.
Yeah, I don't get that - probably I'm missing something. If they output a shit signal, I can pay big bucks to watch a shit signal... or pirate a shit signal. I know what direction that shift would be pushing me towards.
I'd argue, that the whole reason Manhunt 2 has been banned is not because there is a problem with the game as such, but because the BBFC felt it had no choice due to the public uproar various anti-video game media establishments like the BBC have produced - you only have to look at this weeks Panorama for a top notch example of the problem. Panorama's gone to hell since it became weekly. That shift is an example of one of the main causes of shoddy journalism today - overworked journos trying to meet deadlines, leaving no time to do any proper investigative reporting.
Bloggers think they matter again! Indeed. "...security nerds were ripping Apple for a buggy beta..." he says. Since when do you need to be a "security nerd" to think that a buggy piece of software isn't very impressive?
The United States has almost 10 times the population of Canada. Pen & paper / hand counting is neither desirable nor reasonable. You could have 10 times the number of people counting the vote. Just a thought.
It seems to me to be more along the lines of, there's no real legal need for AT&T to do this, as they're already immune to prosecution by copyright holders if users transmit copyrighted information across their networks. Thus, the only reason they would have to implement something like this involves the crisp, green lining in their pockets getting a bit thicker. That or they see a nice, easy way to cut down on the amount of bandwidth they're having to provide.
Imagine how this could be applied to burn victims. I don't think it's there yet. I'm not sure anything that uses solid epoxy resins as healing agents is likely to get FDA (or whatever the appropriate body is!) approval for use in people. In industry though... it could be very cool to have an aeroplane that could deal with a crack in the hull, or a spacecraft which could fill micrometeorite holes.
I'm sure we will. And when we do, I have a number of candidates for who should be sent there. Hairdressers, tired TV producers, insurance salesmen, personnel officers, security guards, public relations executives, management consultants, the middlemen you see.
...Or how much I would pay for my distance glasses to 'turn off' if I was reading.
I would put up with a bit more bulk on my face because it would reduce eye strain. You could just take them off.
If it said that, your comment would make sense. That would be something like... "We don't think Apple will fix it, so we won't wait before announcing it". I could see that (though not agree with it). But "We don't think Apple will fix it, so we won't even TELL them about it" is totally irresponsible. The only "rational" interpretation of that is he actively wants to make it harder to improve the security of Safari.
Do you have a better explanation, or a justification for that approach? [note: I'm not the 'you' referred to in the parent]
Why would someone announce that he's found a vulnerability but refuse to disclose it to the vendor? Some ideas:
a) He wants to hurt the reputation of the product/vendor. (This doesn't even require the existence of a real vulnerability.)
b) He wants to sell the specifics vulnerability, either to the vendor or to the highest bidder (in which case, this is advertising).
c) He doesn't care about the security side of things, he's just earning himself some free PR on sites like this which will publish his unsupported claims uncritically.
d) This is his idea of fun.
Sorry, but liquids bending light does not qualify as a mystery of nature. Theory and math behind optics is taught in high school physics... They teach ray tracing in high school physics. Between that and the real physics - Maxwell's equations - is a bit of a gap.
Make sure you cook your Britney thoroughly first, no telling what diseases she's carrying. And pierce the skin on the chest to avoid explosions during cooking.
"The subject matter sought to be patented must be sufficiently different from what has been used or described before that it may be said to be nonobvious to a person having ordinary skill in the area of technology related to the invention."
These "developers" he spoke of, might they have "ordinary skill in the area of technology related to the invention."? I'm not sure. I am sure however, that anyone who starts bandying about terms like "fucking moron" better have a very clear argument ready to back himself up, or he might look like an uneducated, arrogant troll.
I heard a similar one, where the guy answering pretends to be a policeman at a crime scene, and holds the telemarketer on the line, asking him questions about the deceased and generally freaking the guy out.
Slashdot Mirror
Could you indicate who those folks are? I've failed on that front, and just resorted to advising people on my mailing list to leave hotmail.
In Soviet China, nuclear submarine shows Google.
Yeah, just imagine him doing Shakespeare.
...If the copyright notice on this free CD says that anyone can copy and distribute, that is a different matter alltogether.I wonder if anyone would question that "shrink wrap" agreement? Of course they wouldn't - it would be granting additional rights to the user rather than stripping them away.
No, the iPhone only cures cancer.
Good call - that road occasionally pays off.
"Unexplained affluence, failing to report overseas travel, showing unusual interest in information outside the job scope, keeping unusual work hours, unreported contacts with foreign nationals, unreported contact with foreign government, military, or intelligence officials, attempting to gain new accesses without the need to know, and unexplained absences are all considered potential espionage indicators."
Wow, baring the military & intelligence stuff (which I really doubt anyone would be able to actually spot), that describes a typical grad student lifestyle.
Yeah, I don't get that - probably I'm missing something. If they output a shit signal, I can pay big bucks to watch a shit signal... or pirate a shit signal. I know what direction that shift would be pushing me towards.
...Or how much I would pay for my distance glasses to 'turn off' if I was reading. I would put up with a bit more bulk on my face because it would reduce eye strain. You could just take them off.Do you have a better explanation, or a justification for that approach? [note: I'm not the 'you' referred to in the parent]
Why would someone announce that he's found a vulnerability but refuse to disclose it to the vendor? Some ideas:
a) He wants to hurt the reputation of the product/vendor. (This doesn't even require the existence of a real vulnerability.)
b) He wants to sell the specifics vulnerability, either to the vendor or to the highest bidder (in which case, this is advertising).
c) He doesn't care about the security side of things, he's just earning himself some free PR on sites like this which will publish his unsupported claims uncritically.
d) This is his idea of fun.
Anything I've missed?
http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/doc/general/
"The subject matter sought to be patented must be sufficiently different from what has been used or described before that it may be said to be nonobvious to a person having ordinary skill in the area of technology related to the invention."
These "developers" he spoke of, might they have "ordinary skill in the area of technology related to the invention."? I'm not sure. I am sure however, that anyone who starts bandying about terms like "fucking moron" better have a very clear argument ready to back himself up, or he might look like an uneducated, arrogant troll.
I heard a similar one, where the guy answering pretends to be a policeman at a crime scene, and holds the telemarketer on the line, asking him questions about the deceased and generally freaking the guy out.
Bill Bailey was right!