There are offline packages you can get for Android. Unfortunately I can only confirm they exist. I had looked in to them some but never found a free one and I have a data plan so I didn't care to pay for the ability to use it offline. I thought one of the big companies made an Android based app that is even available on the market place.
I guess I wasn't clear. It wouldn't be a line level IT person on the chopping block, it would be someone higher up the chain. Someone in the organizations IT department is responsible for legally committing that the organization is compliant with required policies. If this turns out to not be the case (as it would almost certainly be with the server) it is their neck on the line. It really depends what your level of responsibility is and what is expected of you in terms of awareness of the network. A good comparison might be if someone walked unsterilized through an operating space while an operation was going on sneezing. The doctors would get upset because the person is putting them and their patient at risk. This situation is really no different. Chances are decent that nothing negative would happen in either case but it is still a breach of legal requirements for which the individual is responsible and also potentially a very serious impact to the patient (whether it be infection or leak of personal information).
I guess maybe the last line is the main difference. Due to the regulations on hospitals, the presence of the box really does put the entire network in jeopardy, not to mention the entire company itself. It could even possibly be a fairly minor risk, but it is still a real one. It's also worth noting that the poster said it "almost makes him angry." I read that as the situation frustrates him to the point of being near anger over the irresponsible risk someone is taking by doing this. Now granted, it sounds like the original poster is unaware of these risks and violations of federal law that it may entail, but that ignorance still doesn't really excuse it since he knows what ITs job is. (In the above comparison, running in to the middle of an operating space would still be taking an irresponsible risk even if I didn't know I was supposed to put on scrubs and wash up first.)
This is a decent possibility if IT doesn't want to maintain it. I'm a developer and have times when I want services available that IT doesn't currently have the resources to provide me, so I work with them to figure out how I can use the services they provide in a manner consistent with corporate and legal policy to get what I need. They might not be able to meet your exact request directly do to business limitations, but they may be able to help you get something setup externally to the network that can do what you need it to do and have a safe, secure way back in to the network that is properly managed.
It isn't "respect my authoritay." It is "I fear for what impact this could have on my job." Regulations on privacy information are difficult enough to hold to even when you control all the pieces. Things like this make it way harder and if their is a breach, there's a good chance someone in IT is paying for it with their job and quite possibly their career (if not jail time). I'm a developer with IT admin experience, and while my day to day activities don't normally involve IT admining, I completely understand why someone would get almost angry over a situation like this.
You are confusing IT with DBA (if present) and Development. Users should never, ever, ever have direct access to data, period. Developers should never have access to live production systems and real data. If present, DBAs should have access to the data but not the system and should be audited like crazy. If not, IT/App support generally handles their function on the data side of the house. Basically the idea is that users can only get to data through safe guards developers put in and only IT can deploy developer changes so developers can't compromise the system. Then within IT only a few people would actually have direct data access, but it would still be within IT that that would exist as it is necessary for keeping the system running and correcting any problems.
If it exists on a network where the information passes, it falls under HIPAA for providers. HIPAA is a general PITA and I only have to deal with it as a third party. That said, I think that the issue between IT and users is normally that users that cause problems typically are competent at getting things done, but don't necessarily understand the full impact of their actions. (For example, the server mentioned by the OP is a very real and very legitimate threat and leaves the organization open to multi-million dollar lawsuits if something goes wrong.)
IT isn't just in the business of making things happen, but also making sure that things keep working... all the time. A corporate network is a lot different from a home network. If you screw up and take your router offline for a bit, it doesn't matter. If the same thing happens in the corporate world, it rapidly can start adding up to more than the tech makes in a year if not in his life time. This tends to make a very cautious culture which seems to be slow or disinterested to users. The best way to get what you need is to make a strong argument for what benefit it gives and why you need it and keep pestering periodically to make sure it doesn't fall to a back burner. This is something we have to do even within IT. I've been working for about a month and a half to get an instant messaging server up (I'm a developer but farming out to the infrastructure side of the house on this one.), but when it is done, it will be done right and will be supportable going forward.
In the end, trying to do an end run around IT is generally a huge risk for everyone. If you really need something and think you could do it yourself, talk to IT about it before hand so they know what is going on and can raise any objections or concerns you might not know about. Having the open communication will really help and the fact you are willing to approach it yourself will help show the level of need you have.
You missed the point of his question. The greed is not the collecting, but rather the lack of compensating the creators. It requires effort to produce ideas and why should taking risks to create ideas not be rewarded. While I don't agree with much of how copyright is currently enforced, it is substantially important to reward those who create and is greedy to expect them to work for nothing by simply consuming what they make without providing some compensation for it.
Hmm, that still would make it edits by the Jews rather than Luther, but it does make an interesting point. Do you by any chance have any references I could look at. My searches basically just showed that there is a lot of general confusion about the history of Jewish canon during the time frame of 400BCE to 100CE.
Except all you have to do is open it up in a clean room and pull out the platters to defeat the self-wiping behavior. It might be able to wipe out the keystore, but that assumes there isn't a way to break the encryption already available.
I have considered writing a DRM manifesto for a while now. I do think that DRM has a valid place in the world, but it needs to meet certain criteria. First and foremost it must never negatively impact a legitimate user more than the pirate. As you mentioned, Steam gets this very close to right. I am able to use the software on multiple systems, can use it when not connected to the internet as long as I updated recently and it simplifies the update process to something I don't even have to think about. The only thing I would really like to see added are guarantees that after a certain period of time, or at a minimum if support is ended, that a unlocked, DRM free version of the software will be released. Also, a simple phone option must be available for situations where you do not have an internet connection. I have some other finer points, but these are a few of my big issues.
Unfortunately innocent_white_lamb is much closer to the reality of the music business. The music business really is a very tight knit community with a very small number of actual major players. Big label music is largely about marketing and pushing production of a product (in this case Justin Bieber). I know lots of people his age that can play two instruments and write their own music. The only difference isn't some extraordinary skill on his part, but rather that he was able to make the right connections, get stuff written mostly for him, rather than by him, (though with his comments making an impact I'm sure) getting a market image created and then sold like crazy until it can't sell anymore. This is not exactly a new pattern and can be seen time and time again. Yes some actors and artists break out of this sub-set of the market, but many lack the skill to actually build a career on their own.
Unfortunately, on an artistic level, many of us that work with the business see this activity as selling out and it can take a very long time and some very good quality work to ever redeem the "evil" of producing mass marketed, marketing department crap as if it were your own music. One example (though from film and not music) is Shia Labeouf. I couldn't stand the guy for a long time because of his work on Even Stevens, but after making repeatedly good performances on a variety of roles, I have to acknowledge that he is a skilled actor and broke away from his (imo) sold out start.
Hostile much? I have under 4000 edits, almost all of them vandalism removal related and any time I make a content update, it sticks. Even when I was much lower in edits they stuck and I was actively encouraged to edit more with constructive edits than simple removal of obvious vandalism. Did you source your edits? Non-grammatical edits without source from users with low edit counts that haven't been mentioned on the discussion page do tend to be reverted as the volume of edits makes trying to discover information sources very difficult. My guess is not that the community was somehow biased against you, but that you may have been doing something outside of community guidelines (even if unintentionally). Wikipedia editors have a hard job when it comes to sorting out useful submissions from harmful ones and will tend to err on the side of caution.
Actually, the Apocrypha has nothing to do with Luther and rather is derived from what books appeared in the Vulgate but not in the Hebrew Old Testiment or Greek New Testiment. Luther then removed further books from the Latin Vulgate after the initial split.
At it's core, science (or at least the application of science) can not exist without philosophy and in such requires a measure (even if small) of faith. If nothing more than simply having faith that your observations are in fact reality. You also have to have faith to believe anything you have not tested yourself or even to believe that your tests didn't miss something. It may be faith in others, faith in yourself or faith in observations matching reality, but it is still unproven (and in some cases unprovable) elements of faith in your understanding.
That said, I wouldn't compare it to the kind of faith you see in most religions where something is believed without proof or wanting of proof, but it is still faith none the less. I would never compare the level of faith to say "I believe there is a sun." to the level of faith required to say "I believe there is an all powerful God interested in my day to day life." but both still have an element of unknown and unproven to them, even if very small. Science is not the pursuit of proving anything, but rather the pursuit of trying to reduce the burden of faith and increase understanding. It can never eliminate faith entirely.
In fairness, high speed rail would be a huge boon for shipping and would take a huge burden off the roads. A lot of freight moves by truck in the US and that's really not ideal for road costs and would be much more cheaply done via rail. Commuter use of rail would be nice, but you are right, in the US it will likely always be secondary to air travel unless rail freight brought the cost down substantially for commuter use.
I would challenge that even if the organization itself can in fact be traced back to early church fathers, it does not mean that it is the same organization throughout time or that it has not fallen to great corruption at many times. Case and point, ancient Israel. Also, I must also question your use of "the scandal of Protestantism" as even the Roman canonized Bible gives no real strong case in justification of the organization, only the organization's own claim.
Business people don't understand what is available in technology which is why they are paying for it to be someone else's profit, err problem. Sad but true, same reason people buy Bose speakers and Apple products.
While Microsoft's approach to mobile didn't work out for them in the long run, I don't think the beating they take is completely valid. PocketPC was extremely successful in the business devices market with things like integrated barcode scanners and such specifically because it followed Microsoft's traditional "make it compatible with everything" philosophy. The interface was not designed for touch, but at the time it was designed, everything was using styluses and developing for the devices was super easy and fit intuitively with a desktop development workflow. Platform forward compatibility has always been big for Microsoft and you could generally get apps designed for Windows Mobile 3 to work on Windows Mobile 6.5. For business using it on integrated devices, this was very key. I know that I abandoned the Windows Mobile line the day I heard that they were abandoning this model for Windows Phone 7 Series and switched to Android for it's openness.
I'm not saying that Microsoft's design philosophy fits everyone and clearly for most consumers, the more touch friendly and simpler UI that Apple came up with was far better than what was available to date, but Zune's interface is pretty nice too and actually (imo) prettier than Apple's and Windows Phone 7 derives from that. I just don't like locked down platforms. What I am saying is that Microsoft is and always has been primarily business focused and that leads to different priorities and I think they fill these very well.
I agree with your reasoning and personally I agree that tablets in their current form do not have a future outside a niche market (just like they haven't had for the past 8 years. Hate to say it but tablets are NOT new with the iPad, just less powerful and a little smaller but still not small enough to effortlessly carry.), but I think that it will be a much stronger case after we see a comparable and cheaper device not sell. I actually thought about a Xoom but I know for me the issue was cost. $600 AND an overpriced minimum contract is not something I'm interested in when I could have a more powerful laptop that barely weighs more and could wirelessly tether to my phone for so much less. Drop the price to $400 and no required contract, I'd consider it as a media viewing device, but still would probably not use it much and I'm normally an early adopter regardless of price if I see a device having a real tangible benefit.
Having worked with a gaming news website, I know it is also common place to do a quick search to see if anyone else has similar content up prior to posting an article. The time in the log seems very short to right an article and far more likely to be an editor searching for similar content to determine if it is worth publishing. Not saying that is necessarily what happened here, but one log file record that close in time to the publish time is hardly a strong argument.
Slashdot Mirror
There are offline packages you can get for Android. Unfortunately I can only confirm they exist. I had looked in to them some but never found a free one and I have a data plan so I didn't care to pay for the ability to use it offline. I thought one of the big companies made an Android based app that is even available on the market place.
But he would have prior art, so they could invalidate your patent.
I guess I wasn't clear. It wouldn't be a line level IT person on the chopping block, it would be someone higher up the chain. Someone in the organizations IT department is responsible for legally committing that the organization is compliant with required policies. If this turns out to not be the case (as it would almost certainly be with the server) it is their neck on the line. It really depends what your level of responsibility is and what is expected of you in terms of awareness of the network. A good comparison might be if someone walked unsterilized through an operating space while an operation was going on sneezing. The doctors would get upset because the person is putting them and their patient at risk. This situation is really no different. Chances are decent that nothing negative would happen in either case but it is still a breach of legal requirements for which the individual is responsible and also potentially a very serious impact to the patient (whether it be infection or leak of personal information).
I guess maybe the last line is the main difference. Due to the regulations on hospitals, the presence of the box really does put the entire network in jeopardy, not to mention the entire company itself. It could even possibly be a fairly minor risk, but it is still a real one. It's also worth noting that the poster said it "almost makes him angry." I read that as the situation frustrates him to the point of being near anger over the irresponsible risk someone is taking by doing this. Now granted, it sounds like the original poster is unaware of these risks and violations of federal law that it may entail, but that ignorance still doesn't really excuse it since he knows what ITs job is. (In the above comparison, running in to the middle of an operating space would still be taking an irresponsible risk even if I didn't know I was supposed to put on scrubs and wash up first.)
This is a decent possibility if IT doesn't want to maintain it. I'm a developer and have times when I want services available that IT doesn't currently have the resources to provide me, so I work with them to figure out how I can use the services they provide in a manner consistent with corporate and legal policy to get what I need. They might not be able to meet your exact request directly do to business limitations, but they may be able to help you get something setup externally to the network that can do what you need it to do and have a safe, secure way back in to the network that is properly managed.
It isn't "respect my authoritay." It is "I fear for what impact this could have on my job." Regulations on privacy information are difficult enough to hold to even when you control all the pieces. Things like this make it way harder and if their is a breach, there's a good chance someone in IT is paying for it with their job and quite possibly their career (if not jail time). I'm a developer with IT admin experience, and while my day to day activities don't normally involve IT admining, I completely understand why someone would get almost angry over a situation like this.
You are confusing IT with DBA (if present) and Development. Users should never, ever, ever have direct access to data, period. Developers should never have access to live production systems and real data. If present, DBAs should have access to the data but not the system and should be audited like crazy. If not, IT/App support generally handles their function on the data side of the house. Basically the idea is that users can only get to data through safe guards developers put in and only IT can deploy developer changes so developers can't compromise the system. Then within IT only a few people would actually have direct data access, but it would still be within IT that that would exist as it is necessary for keeping the system running and correcting any problems.
If it exists on a network where the information passes, it falls under HIPAA for providers. HIPAA is a general PITA and I only have to deal with it as a third party. That said, I think that the issue between IT and users is normally that users that cause problems typically are competent at getting things done, but don't necessarily understand the full impact of their actions. (For example, the server mentioned by the OP is a very real and very legitimate threat and leaves the organization open to multi-million dollar lawsuits if something goes wrong.)
IT isn't just in the business of making things happen, but also making sure that things keep working... all the time. A corporate network is a lot different from a home network. If you screw up and take your router offline for a bit, it doesn't matter. If the same thing happens in the corporate world, it rapidly can start adding up to more than the tech makes in a year if not in his life time. This tends to make a very cautious culture which seems to be slow or disinterested to users. The best way to get what you need is to make a strong argument for what benefit it gives and why you need it and keep pestering periodically to make sure it doesn't fall to a back burner. This is something we have to do even within IT. I've been working for about a month and a half to get an instant messaging server up (I'm a developer but farming out to the infrastructure side of the house on this one.), but when it is done, it will be done right and will be supportable going forward.
In the end, trying to do an end run around IT is generally a huge risk for everyone. If you really need something and think you could do it yourself, talk to IT about it before hand so they know what is going on and can raise any objections or concerns you might not know about. Having the open communication will really help and the fact you are willing to approach it yourself will help show the level of need you have.
Don't forget to flush your buffers.
You missed the point of his question. The greed is not the collecting, but rather the lack of compensating the creators. It requires effort to produce ideas and why should taking risks to create ideas not be rewarded. While I don't agree with much of how copyright is currently enforced, it is substantially important to reward those who create and is greedy to expect them to work for nothing by simply consuming what they make without providing some compensation for it.
Hmm, that still would make it edits by the Jews rather than Luther, but it does make an interesting point. Do you by any chance have any references I could look at. My searches basically just showed that there is a lot of general confusion about the history of Jewish canon during the time frame of 400BCE to 100CE.
I have a $4000 hard drive to prove it.
Except all you have to do is open it up in a clean room and pull out the platters to defeat the self-wiping behavior. It might be able to wipe out the keystore, but that assumes there isn't a way to break the encryption already available.
I have considered writing a DRM manifesto for a while now. I do think that DRM has a valid place in the world, but it needs to meet certain criteria. First and foremost it must never negatively impact a legitimate user more than the pirate. As you mentioned, Steam gets this very close to right. I am able to use the software on multiple systems, can use it when not connected to the internet as long as I updated recently and it simplifies the update process to something I don't even have to think about. The only thing I would really like to see added are guarantees that after a certain period of time, or at a minimum if support is ended, that a unlocked, DRM free version of the software will be released. Also, a simple phone option must be available for situations where you do not have an internet connection. I have some other finer points, but these are a few of my big issues.
AFS on Athena is quite nice too.
Unfortunately innocent_white_lamb is much closer to the reality of the music business. The music business really is a very tight knit community with a very small number of actual major players. Big label music is largely about marketing and pushing production of a product (in this case Justin Bieber). I know lots of people his age that can play two instruments and write their own music. The only difference isn't some extraordinary skill on his part, but rather that he was able to make the right connections, get stuff written mostly for him, rather than by him, (though with his comments making an impact I'm sure) getting a market image created and then sold like crazy until it can't sell anymore. This is not exactly a new pattern and can be seen time and time again. Yes some actors and artists break out of this sub-set of the market, but many lack the skill to actually build a career on their own.
Unfortunately, on an artistic level, many of us that work with the business see this activity as selling out and it can take a very long time and some very good quality work to ever redeem the "evil" of producing mass marketed, marketing department crap as if it were your own music. One example (though from film and not music) is Shia Labeouf. I couldn't stand the guy for a long time because of his work on Even Stevens, but after making repeatedly good performances on a variety of roles, I have to acknowledge that he is a skilled actor and broke away from his (imo) sold out start.
Hostile much? I have under 4000 edits, almost all of them vandalism removal related and any time I make a content update, it sticks. Even when I was much lower in edits they stuck and I was actively encouraged to edit more with constructive edits than simple removal of obvious vandalism. Did you source your edits? Non-grammatical edits without source from users with low edit counts that haven't been mentioned on the discussion page do tend to be reverted as the volume of edits makes trying to discover information sources very difficult. My guess is not that the community was somehow biased against you, but that you may have been doing something outside of community guidelines (even if unintentionally). Wikipedia editors have a hard job when it comes to sorting out useful submissions from harmful ones and will tend to err on the side of caution.
Actually, the Apocrypha has nothing to do with Luther and rather is derived from what books appeared in the Vulgate but not in the Hebrew Old Testiment or Greek New Testiment. Luther then removed further books from the Latin Vulgate after the initial split.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_apocrypha
At it's core, science (or at least the application of science) can not exist without philosophy and in such requires a measure (even if small) of faith. If nothing more than simply having faith that your observations are in fact reality. You also have to have faith to believe anything you have not tested yourself or even to believe that your tests didn't miss something. It may be faith in others, faith in yourself or faith in observations matching reality, but it is still unproven (and in some cases unprovable) elements of faith in your understanding.
That said, I wouldn't compare it to the kind of faith you see in most religions where something is believed without proof or wanting of proof, but it is still faith none the less. I would never compare the level of faith to say "I believe there is a sun." to the level of faith required to say "I believe there is an all powerful God interested in my day to day life." but both still have an element of unknown and unproven to them, even if very small. Science is not the pursuit of proving anything, but rather the pursuit of trying to reduce the burden of faith and increase understanding. It can never eliminate faith entirely.
In fairness, high speed rail would be a huge boon for shipping and would take a huge burden off the roads. A lot of freight moves by truck in the US and that's really not ideal for road costs and would be much more cheaply done via rail. Commuter use of rail would be nice, but you are right, in the US it will likely always be secondary to air travel unless rail freight brought the cost down substantially for commuter use.
I would challenge that even if the organization itself can in fact be traced back to early church fathers, it does not mean that it is the same organization throughout time or that it has not fallen to great corruption at many times. Case and point, ancient Israel. Also, I must also question your use of "the scandal of Protestantism" as even the Roman canonized Bible gives no real strong case in justification of the organization, only the organization's own claim.
Business people don't understand what is available in technology which is why they are paying for it to be someone else's profit, err problem. Sad but true, same reason people buy Bose speakers and Apple products.
While Microsoft's approach to mobile didn't work out for them in the long run, I don't think the beating they take is completely valid. PocketPC was extremely successful in the business devices market with things like integrated barcode scanners and such specifically because it followed Microsoft's traditional "make it compatible with everything" philosophy. The interface was not designed for touch, but at the time it was designed, everything was using styluses and developing for the devices was super easy and fit intuitively with a desktop development workflow. Platform forward compatibility has always been big for Microsoft and you could generally get apps designed for Windows Mobile 3 to work on Windows Mobile 6.5. For business using it on integrated devices, this was very key. I know that I abandoned the Windows Mobile line the day I heard that they were abandoning this model for Windows Phone 7 Series and switched to Android for it's openness.
I'm not saying that Microsoft's design philosophy fits everyone and clearly for most consumers, the more touch friendly and simpler UI that Apple came up with was far better than what was available to date, but Zune's interface is pretty nice too and actually (imo) prettier than Apple's and Windows Phone 7 derives from that. I just don't like locked down platforms. What I am saying is that Microsoft is and always has been primarily business focused and that leads to different priorities and I think they fill these very well.
I agree with your reasoning and personally I agree that tablets in their current form do not have a future outside a niche market (just like they haven't had for the past 8 years. Hate to say it but tablets are NOT new with the iPad, just less powerful and a little smaller but still not small enough to effortlessly carry.), but I think that it will be a much stronger case after we see a comparable and cheaper device not sell. I actually thought about a Xoom but I know for me the issue was cost. $600 AND an overpriced minimum contract is not something I'm interested in when I could have a more powerful laptop that barely weighs more and could wirelessly tether to my phone for so much less. Drop the price to $400 and no required contract, I'd consider it as a media viewing device, but still would probably not use it much and I'm normally an early adopter regardless of price if I see a device having a real tangible benefit.
Sony?
Having worked with a gaming news website, I know it is also common place to do a quick search to see if anyone else has similar content up prior to posting an article. The time in the log seems very short to right an article and far more likely to be an editor searching for similar content to determine if it is worth publishing. Not saying that is necessarily what happened here, but one log file record that close in time to the publish time is hardly a strong argument.