In my opinion, it would have been "evil" of Google to not comply with China's request. It would be the same as refusing to give food to North Korea because you do not like their government. I do not think letting millions of people starve would be the best approach to overthrowing the North Korean government. I also do not think the best way to liberate China from their oppressive regime is to isolate them even further.
IMO, the two things do not equate, as the Chinese can live without the Internet, but the North Koreans cannot live without food (though they've done so longer than I would have thought possible without pulling down their government).
That said, I agree with the basic premise of your argument, although in Google's case, it can be said that the bottom line in this case drove their decision more than geopolitical expediency or the welfare of the masses. While not "evil", it was certainly not justifiable on moral grounds. If we believe in equality and human rights, then the Chinese people have just as much right to free expression and exchange of ideas as anyone else.
The Shuttle at that time was made up of the Orbiter, a Fuel Tank and two Solid Rocket Boosters, there was an explosion, so I think Mister Oberg is wrong for saying it did not "explode in the common definition of that word". It blew up.
To clarify: The Orbiter did not explode; it was destroyed by aerodynamic forces applied to the fuselage at pressures higher than tolerable in places not designed for such forces. The Solid Rocket Boosters did not explode; one booster suffered a burn-through which led to the structural failure of the External Tank which caused the Orbiter to become disconnected from the tank and led to its breakup. The External Tank was ruptured and the internal fuel tanks spilled their contents; the hypergolics were mixed in an uncontrolled fashion, ignited, then proceeded to ignite liquid oxygen which caused a flash-over. By the time this fireball was seen, the Orbiter had already broken into several sections and was only trivially affected by the blast.
RIM created this problem by not having the foresight when the whole thing with NTP first surfaced, to create a contingency system which avoided the systems in question. Lack of vision now threatens to destroy everything they've built up, if they're fix to this problem is not easy for Blackberry users to implement and use.
That said, no one can truly anticipate where the attack is going to come from, but in developing a service you have to be prepared for anything to occur which may alter your service's operation. This doesn't mean just Business Continuity Planning for Katrina- and 9/11-type disasters, but the possibility of patent fights, industrial espionage, and just plain stupidity. It may add to lead times and slow production and upgrades, but more time spent up front will save a lot of time on the back end.
The article, even the summary, clearly indicates all they are patenting is the process of using a smiley on the phone/sending it. They are NOT patenting the smiley, that's just an inflammatory headline used to create negative response.
And yet that doesn't make it any less ridiculous. Look, the original emoticons were around from the beginning of USENET and have been co-opted in all sorts of garish ways. They have become ubiquitous and you can't patent something that is such. This just points out how stupid the patent system has become. Isn't it possible people were texting smileys to each other before Cingular even existed?
In its decision, the FTC slammed ChoicePoint, saying that it did not have reasonable procedures in place to screen prospective subscribers and that it turned over sensitive personal information to subscribers whose applications raised obvious red flags.
Hello, ChoicePoint? My name is Al... Al Kayduh... yes, I'm looking for the personal information for some decadent American spawns of... I mean fine, upstanding Americans...
If these responses are genuine then it's clear to see that MS is taking security more seriously. However, their methodology leaves a lot to be desired. The Security Development Lifecycle can't be a seperate function but needs to be an integrated part of the normal Software Development Lifecycle (notice they're both SDL). It starts at the level of the code jockey; I get the sense that they don't really know the competence level of the people they have writing code and they certainly haven't drummed the idea of secure code-writing into their heads. If that's true, all the rest of it doesn't matter. Security review has to start at the code writing level and work its way up slowly; given the market pressure, I don't see that happening.
Weather records can only "increase" (ie. get more extreme) - they cannot, by definition, get smaller.
Definitely obvious, but the reasoning is "trivial". Weather is not a stochastic process, but is linked to variables including (but not limited to) the amount of greenhouse gas in the atmosphere. If you look in terms of only records, then your argument is correct. However, if you look at average global temperature rise, you'll note that while the global temperature fluctuates, the overall trend is a steady rise.
The International Space Station (ISS) would play a key role in the project and a regular transport relay to the moon would be established with the help of the planned Clipper spaceship and the Parom, a space capsule intended to tug heavy cargo containers around space, Mr Sevastyanov said.
"Then we will be able to drop bombs on... is microphone still on?"
In the broader context of planetary science, I believe they mean that it is a small rocky body (if you call something 5 and 1/2 Earth masses small) as opposed to a gas giant such as Jupiter and Saturn. There's more on New Scientist.
Gravitons are supposed to be the exchange particle for gravitation, as the photon is for electromagnetic force. The graviton and photon are chargeless, massless particles, differentiated by their spin. The strong and weak nuclear forces are also mediated by exchange particles (W & Z for the weak, Gluons for strong quark interactions, Pions for strong nucleon interactions). The graviton's importance is in serving as a moderator of the gravitational force; if this theory is correct, then it won't be long before someone will come up with an idea for exposing the graviton to the light of day.
Two of the most popular and flexible open-source Content Management Systems are vi and emacs...
Funny or not, I used them (and Notepad on occasion) successfully for years to manage content, using pages built on SSI. Toss in a couple of Perl scripts to move content around and there you were - just load content to be posted into a special directory structure, have the script look for content in that directory structure, and move content accordingly, archiving the current content. No fuss or muss, with only the occasional headache when someone would hand you some odd-sized piece of content that would mangle a page somehow.
I think one of the biggest problems facing our society is not being willing to acknowledge when the other group is correct or when we are wrong. Everyone is too convinced that they are correct that they are blind to the other person's point of view and opinions.
I don't think it can be pinned to the idea of "one side is correct and the other is not." Both sides often have convincing arguments but these are overwhelmed by "politics." Partisan bickering has replaced thoughtful discourse. The idea is to build consensus, to winnow out the good from the ideas of both sides and merge them into a coherent, mutually satisfying compromise. This retreat-to-the-castle-and-raise-the-drawbridge mentality that seems to pervade Congress is the reason that elections are so hotly contested and have led to the detestable "red state/blue state" school of politics.
Let me just say, that (assuming the OP wasn't karma whoring, which My karma-dar is going off pretty strong on)...
To which I reply, what would be the point? Karma doesn't interest me, except in the concept of your actions and their results having an influence on your future.
You have a kid with a passion and you just can't wait to knock the wind out of his sails on Slashdot?
You bet! Because this is kind compared with what happens in the real world. He wants to hack his own box, fine (and that is precisely what I said originally) but past that, he's treading on thin ice. Hacking a system that is not your is simply wrong. He took his lumps for it and apparently has learned a lesson. I say apparently because the hacking bug, once it bites, seldom goes away. Once you get a taste of that power, what is there to really stop you from doing it again?
I don't want to pour cold water on anyone who wants to learn and enjoy what they are learning, but when you tread the thin line between legal and illegal, it's time for a new direction. If he's truly interested in making things more secure, then find a better way instead of tempting fate.
Yeah? What's your point? You don't see insecure deisign as a problem?
You better believe it's a problem. If he's so interested in programming and security, let him take classes and develop some skills and then get a job writing and testing virus scanners, or firewalls, or encryption algorithms. Just because I see someone make an illegal U-turn doesn't give me the "right" to stop and arrest them, and just because a system is insecure doesn't give a script-kiddie the "right" to hack it.
I am a teenager and I have gotten in trouble with school for "hacking"
Good. That's the idea.
I had no malintentions, but I see why they have to do such penalties.
Word of advice: instead of hacking, trying paying attention in English class, specifically grammar.
However, the main problem is that the code is not secure, not that I was messing around during a free period and found a way to bypass the "security."
The problem is that you don't see your hacking as a problem. No one asked you to hack their system, it is not your job to test the school's security, and frankly it is irresponsible. That's like saying the main problem is they lock the vaults, noth that I'm trying to break in and rob the bank.
I encourage students and others curious to set their own "box" up and use that to "hack" into.
That's fine, though perhaps instead of hacking you could be learning to churn out first-class code to do useful work.
I do not see hobbyist computer hacking as a REAL threat, because if they can hack into a system, that system is definitely NOT secure from true hackers with illegal, immoral fraud schemes, etc in mind.
Since when is hacking a hobby? You're trying to compromise a computer system, which is fine if it's your own system, but illegal if it's not. The level of security of the system does not matter, what matters is the system is not your plaything.
Remember, set up your own comp to hack into, you will gain the knowledge from seeing how these things work, and not get in trouble.
Try simply reading books and taking courses in computer programming from people with knowledge and passion and you'll learn a lot more.
Slashdot Mirror
IMO, the two things do not equate, as the Chinese can live without the Internet, but the North Koreans cannot live without food (though they've done so longer than I would have thought possible without pulling down their government).
That said, I agree with the basic premise of your argument, although in Google's case, it can be said that the bottom line in this case drove their decision more than geopolitical expediency or the welfare of the masses. While not "evil", it was certainly not justifiable on moral grounds. If we believe in equality and human rights, then the Chinese people have just as much right to free expression and exchange of ideas as anyone else.
To clarify: The Orbiter did not explode; it was destroyed by aerodynamic forces applied to the fuselage at pressures higher than tolerable in places not designed for such forces. The Solid Rocket Boosters did not explode; one booster suffered a burn-through which led to the structural failure of the External Tank which caused the Orbiter to become disconnected from the tank and led to its breakup. The External Tank was ruptured and the internal fuel tanks spilled their contents; the hypergolics were mixed in an uncontrolled fashion, ignited, then proceeded to ignite liquid oxygen which caused a flash-over. By the time this fireball was seen, the Orbiter had already broken into several sections and was only trivially affected by the blast.
...to decency, honesty, and working for their constituents.
Gee, has anybody seen Bob? His suit's not here...
RIM created this problem by not having the foresight when the whole thing with NTP first surfaced, to create a contingency system which avoided the systems in question. Lack of vision now threatens to destroy everything they've built up, if they're fix to this problem is not easy for Blackberry users to implement and use.
That said, no one can truly anticipate where the attack is going to come from, but in developing a service you have to be prepared for anything to occur which may alter your service's operation. This doesn't mean just Business Continuity Planning for Katrina- and 9/11-type disasters, but the possibility of patent fights, industrial espionage, and just plain stupidity. It may add to lead times and slow production and upgrades, but more time spent up front will save a lot of time on the back end.
And yet that doesn't make it any less ridiculous. Look, the original emoticons were around from the beginning of USENET and have been co-opted in all sorts of garish ways. They have become ubiquitous and you can't patent something that is such. This just points out how stupid the patent system has become. Isn't it possible people were texting smileys to each other before Cingular even existed?
Hello, ChoicePoint? My name is Al... Al Kayduh... yes, I'm looking for the personal information for some decadent American spawns of... I mean fine, upstanding Americans...
Woof!
British Parliament repeals Law of Gravitation; Britons now forced to float around on the breeze. Tony Blair is said to be "put off."
If these responses are genuine then it's clear to see that MS is taking security more seriously. However, their methodology leaves a lot to be desired. The Security Development Lifecycle can't be a seperate function but needs to be an integrated part of the normal Software Development Lifecycle (notice they're both SDL). It starts at the level of the code jockey; I get the sense that they don't really know the competence level of the people they have writing code and they certainly haven't drummed the idea of secure code-writing into their heads. If that's true, all the rest of it doesn't matter. Security review has to start at the code writing level and work its way up slowly; given the market pressure, I don't see that happening.
Definitely obvious, but the reasoning is "trivial". Weather is not a stochastic process, but is linked to variables including (but not limited to) the amount of greenhouse gas in the atmosphere. If you look in terms of only records, then your argument is correct. However, if you look at average global temperature rise, you'll note that while the global temperature fluctuates, the overall trend is a steady rise.
Thanks for the advice. Now that I'm at home, it loads just fine. Connection at work must have been slow.
Depends on who you ask:
Against: CU scientist terms corn-based ethanol "subsidized food burning"
For: Industry Argues That Ethanol Delivers
Talk about knee-jerk moderation...
Cool browser! Unfortunately, it didn't help... I suspect the content's being blocked locally somehow.
"Then we will be able to drop bombs on... is microphone still on?"
In the broader context of planetary science, I believe they mean that it is a small rocky body (if you call something 5 and 1/2 Earth masses small) as opposed to a gas giant such as Jupiter and Saturn. There's more on New Scientist.
And running Firefox 1.5, I can't see any of the graphs... Hmmmmm...
Gravitons are supposed to be the exchange particle for gravitation, as the photon is for electromagnetic force. The graviton and photon are chargeless, massless particles, differentiated by their spin. The strong and weak nuclear forces are also mediated by exchange particles (W & Z for the weak, Gluons for strong quark interactions, Pions for strong nucleon interactions). The graviton's importance is in serving as a moderator of the gravitational force; if this theory is correct, then it won't be long before someone will come up with an idea for exposing the graviton to the light of day.
Funny or not, I used them (and Notepad on occasion) successfully for years to manage content, using pages built on SSI. Toss in a couple of Perl scripts to move content around and there you were - just load content to be posted into a special directory structure, have the script look for content in that directory structure, and move content accordingly, archiving the current content. No fuss or muss, with only the occasional headache when someone would hand you some odd-sized piece of content that would mangle a page somehow.
I don't think it can be pinned to the idea of "one side is correct and the other is not." Both sides often have convincing arguments but these are overwhelmed by "politics." Partisan bickering has replaced thoughtful discourse. The idea is to build consensus, to winnow out the good from the ideas of both sides and merge them into a coherent, mutually satisfying compromise. This retreat-to-the-castle-and-raise-the-drawbridge mentality that seems to pervade Congress is the reason that elections are so hotly contested and have led to the detestable "red state/blue state" school of politics.
To which I reply, what would be the point? Karma doesn't interest me, except in the concept of your actions and their results having an influence on your future.
You have a kid with a passion and you just can't wait to knock the wind out of his sails on Slashdot?You bet! Because this is kind compared with what happens in the real world. He wants to hack his own box, fine (and that is precisely what I said originally) but past that, he's treading on thin ice. Hacking a system that is not your is simply wrong. He took his lumps for it and apparently has learned a lesson. I say apparently because the hacking bug, once it bites, seldom goes away. Once you get a taste of that power, what is there to really stop you from doing it again?
I don't want to pour cold water on anyone who wants to learn and enjoy what they are learning, but when you tread the thin line between legal and illegal, it's time for a new direction. If he's truly interested in making things more secure, then find a better way instead of tempting fate.
You better believe it's a problem. If he's so interested in programming and security, let him take classes and develop some skills and then get a job writing and testing virus scanners, or firewalls, or encryption algorithms. Just because I see someone make an illegal U-turn doesn't give me the "right" to stop and arrest them, and just because a system is insecure doesn't give a script-kiddie the "right" to hack it.
Good. That's the idea.
I had no malintentions, but I see why they have to do such penalties.Word of advice: instead of hacking, trying paying attention in English class, specifically grammar.
However, the main problem is that the code is not secure, not that I was messing around during a free period and found a way to bypass the "security."The problem is that you don't see your hacking as a problem. No one asked you to hack their system, it is not your job to test the school's security, and frankly it is irresponsible. That's like saying the main problem is they lock the vaults, noth that I'm trying to break in and rob the bank.
I encourage students and others curious to set their own "box" up and use that to "hack" into.That's fine, though perhaps instead of hacking you could be learning to churn out first-class code to do useful work.
I do not see hobbyist computer hacking as a REAL threat, because if they can hack into a system, that system is definitely NOT secure from true hackers with illegal, immoral fraud schemes, etc in mind.Since when is hacking a hobby? You're trying to compromise a computer system, which is fine if it's your own system, but illegal if it's not. The level of security of the system does not matter, what matters is the system is not your plaything.
Remember, set up your own comp to hack into, you will gain the knowledge from seeing how these things work, and not get in trouble.Try simply reading books and taking courses in computer programming from people with knowledge and passion and you'll learn a lot more.
...more interesting. The World's First Patent