I'm sorry you feel that way. Unfortunately, I don't subscribe to your educational theory. One of the first things I tell my students is to never take a word I say on face value. Instead, use what I say as a stimulus to formulate your own opinions, your own thoughts, and your own conclusions. Students are not robotrons, to be processed in assembly-line fashion. That model, the factory model, was prevalent in the early 1900's, when the belief was widely held that students could function in the industrial world with a pre-determined foundation of knowledge. It's a cookie-cutter approach that was abandoned long ago.
Education is moving in a direction opposite of what you are advocating. Students are encouraged to learn through discovery, through an exposure of many different viewpoints. I don't like M$ marketing tactics, and my students know it. But I unwaveringly defend their right to express their own opinions, even if it disagrees with my own. I provide them with facts to support my opinion; I fully expect them to back up their (possibly dissenting) opinions with facts as well.
You didn't mention where you live. But chance are, if you live in the US, I would prevail in my willingness to share my politics, my belief system, and my opinions with my students. I would hope that you have instilled, as a responsible parent, a strong belief system in your own children, so that they might be able to better appreciate their own beliefs through opposing viewpoints.
Not only do I refer to Microsoft as M$, but I make sure my students are well aware of my M$ bias by relating to them the underhanded marketing practices M$ engages in. The truth hurts, but I'm sure you'll get over it.
Oh, and I have a problem with dangling prepositions too.
As a high school technology teacher, I'm probably more incensed over the way M$ is trying to blackmail the education system than those who aren't involved in education, as I see first-hand the struggles involved with trying to integrate very inflexible software into the education system. But I'm also a taxpayer in the school district I teach in, and it makes me angry that our school district has also chosen to be a whore to the M$ brothel.
There's a related article over at The Register which exposes yet another nefarious plan by M$ to fleece the public: They are proposing licenses on a per computer or per FTE basis, without regard to whether computer or person runs, installs, or is in any way associated with M$.
I think it would be interesting if those who are sickened by these business tactics were to request from their school districts those EULAs and agreements which govern the use of software in the district. As a taxpayer, you're entitled to this information: If they won't give it up willingly, then surely it can be acquired via an FOIA request (in the states). I know our district has used passage of a $36 million bond issue to outfit our 50,000-student district with more M$ products...exactly what is not needed.
I plan on requesting our district's EULAs through official channels first, then through FOIA channels as a taxpayer. The reason why this situation exists in the first place is the failure of the taxpayers to monitor how their money is being spent.
Now, most IT professionals I talk to don't want to form a union (collective bargaining association)
But it may come down to that in the end. I belonged to a professional union (National Air Traffic Controllers Association), and if it wasn't for NATCA, the FAA would have treated us as indentured slaves. I don't think a professional organization like the Programmers' Guild will be enough. To get the attention of a company, you have to hit them where it hurts, and the only way to do that is to nail them in the pocketbook.
I don't think the Programmers' Guild will wield any influence in the long run, not unless they decide to affiliate with a labor organization and conduct a vote.
They are, I presume, going to laugh all the way to the bank with the added bonus of not even being required to provide whatever goods and services were purchased.
Check out this $1.5 billion subsidy Uncle Sam gave to IBM. What Oracle is doing is nothing new...it's been happening for years, and will continue to happen.
if any area geeks are looking to scavange old gear this might be a prime opportunity
Be careful if you decide to root through the recycling center's collection of old stuff. Many municipalities consider the property their own, making it a criminal act to pilfer from the recycle piles. My own town refuses to let you walk off with recylced computer junk due to hazardous waste laws: It would be like letting you browse through all the discarded pesticides and chemicals, picking the ones you want to take home with you.
>>It's almost impossible to keep students from loading software on University computers.
I'm not so sure about that...I teach in an educational environment, and they have the Windows boxes locked down tighter than [your own simile here]. Fortres is one tough nut to crack, and there's another one called DeepFreeze that isn't as difficult, but well beyond the average college student's abilities to crack.
I'm not saying this software can't be cracked. But there are some programs out there that make it damn difficult to install anything on a Windows machine (much less do anything useful, but that's another story for another day).
Any educational institution that leaves its machines wide open for the general college population without some sort of access control is definitely a likely candidate for your search warrant scenario. They probably deserve to be audited. But if you have nothing to hide, your machines are up-to-snuff, and you've already done your own audit, then so what if the BSA shows up with a search warrant? What are they going to find?
I've been informed that "blue lining" generally refers to pre-employment contracts (that was the situation I described). But I was also told most states grant judges wide discretionary powers when it comes to other forms of contract interpretation. One area of significant judicial interest is when the enforcement of a contract will expose or otherwise threaten trade secrets. I'm sure your university has on-going research they would consider proprietary.
The bottom line here, as others mentioned, is to get your university's attorneys involved, and do you own legal homework! Don't expect the suits to come up with the answers themselves. You might not have a law degree (or maybe you do), but the legal resources are just as accessible to you as they are to the lawyers.
...and that word is "outrageous." If your administration does not step in and put a halt to this egregious evasion, then you can tell them I told you they are a bunch of pussies.
Seriously: Where's the search warrant? How enforceable is a EULA with such broad contractual provisions that it forces a licensee to waive all rights to due process and freedom from illegal searches? (Before you naysayers tell me the Constitution has no bearing in this, check the facts: In many cases, BSA shows up at the doorstep with their very own law enforcement escort.)
There is a legal concept known as "blue-lining" in which a judge has the legal authority to water down, modify, or even eliminate certain portions of a previously-agreed-upon contract. I learned about this after I found myself the unwitting signatory to a capricious and completely illegal legal document. The state recognized the document as legally binding; however, the state also found the terms of the agreement were overly-reaching, capricious, and without legal standing, effectively nullifying the contract.
The reason why companies continue to write obviously unenforceable contracts is that they know the number of people willing to fight in court is very low. Most will simply roll over, expose their underbellies, and submit to being raped rather than fight.
What you all should be wailing and gnashing our teeth about is the piss-poor security model (or lack of security model) Microsoft uses that allows non-privileged programs to arbitrarily remove or modify system settings, programs, and libraries!
One could argue the same could happen on a Linux box running 'su make install', but I could reply that you are a fool if you don't run 'make -n install' first to see what might happen. AFAIK, there's no functionality to do this under Windows.
I have karma points to spare, so I'll throw out this little troll: If you use Windows, then you get what you deserve whenever you blindly install anything without first taking proper precautions.
In my world, "proper precautions" means never allowing Windows to be installed on any of my machines.
So if you dial your bank to transfer funds to checking, or dial your
voicemail to retrieve it, or send a message to someone's pager, your bank account
number and PIN, your voicemail password, whatever you sent to the pager - all
that can be retrieved without a search warrant by any law enforcement official.
So let's say a LEO gets your PIN for your bank account. Would this give said LEO the right to access the account? Worse yet, if the LEO was corrupt, the issue would be moot: You'd be cleaned out in a heartbeat.
I wonder how long it will be before someone comes up with a digital scrambler for secure communications...a pay-per-call "anonymizer" service designed to obfuscate called numbers...hacks to obfuscate one's own phone number...or would all of these be prohibited by the DMCA?
What Lycoris does that none of the other Linux distros really do is limit your options (maybe some do but why nitpick).
I've long made the argument that Linux will have to be "dumbed down" to appeal to the masses. But this doesn't need to be done at the expense of those of us who do, in fact, enjoy being innundated by millions of different configuration permutations.
I believe this is where Microsoft went very wrong: Creating a "one size fits all" environment which deliberately obfuscates the ability to perform custom configurations. Had Microsoft had the foresight to include both "the masses" and the rest of us (geeks), maybe we wouldn't be sitting here on/. arguing about the merits of one Linux distro over another. Instead, we'd be arguing the merits of COM over.NET!
How does this help each user keep track of a large number of passwords? What you have here is a centralized NIS-like database of passwords, but it does nothing to help a user remember what password goes with what machine. Also, this seems like an incredible security risk, putting all your chips down on the bet that you can create a super-secure password server that will never be broken. What happens if you're wrong, or make a mistake?
Why not use one or two well-built passwords (mixed case, punctuation, etc.) and then modify it for each host you need access to...so if you have hosts moe, larry, and curly, then your passwords for each would look something like
Some might argue this is inherently insecure...but I maintain if a password is sufficiently "secure" in terms of randomness, then this method would be no less secure than generating three other random passwords.
The drawback, of course, is that if one password is cracked, you've left yourself wide open...so start with a password you're convinced is secure!
Of course, the better way is some sort of authentication scheme using something like ssh and PKI, which is available on the platforms you mention. But now, you have to worry about securing your private key...to me, it's 6 of one half dozen of the other. Either secure your password or secure your key, because either one stands to be compromized.
What's with the throwaway lines?
on
Stopping Light
·
· Score: -1, Offtopic
Well, I don't think this will mean any immediate changes -
but it is a significant step.
Please, Hemos -- enlighten us with your infinite wisdom, instead of demonstrating your prowess with cheap throwaway lines. Immediate changes to what?
Posting unsubstantiated crap like this (your comments, not the article) does nothing to elevate your status in the eyes of...whomever. It does, however, make you appear as a holier-than-thou know-it-all, one of those guys at work that try to lead you to believe they know more than they really do.
Guess that's the end of my moderation privileges...
Don't forget...
on
Nethack 3.4.0
·
· Score: 4, Informative
...about the Nethack tournament here, starts on Halloween. I've never played the tournament, but all this hype here will probably get me started!
(Accidently hit the Submit button before I was through!)
My thought continues:
Isn't this the reason why distributed networks like Freenet and the like exist? Wouldn't this material be better "hosted" on a distributed network that isn't subject to legal threats?
I'm sure there are mirrors of the offending pages that have been censored by Google...maybe these need to be archived for posterity on Freenet!
Blackhole lists doomed to fail...
on
ORBZ Shuts Down
·
· Score: 2
...as long as individuals and other non-corporate entities run them. Why? Because we've seen how painfully easy it is for corporate or well-heeled individuals to apply pressure (usually monetary) against these individuals.
The solution is to make this process as anonymous as possible, yet maintain some degree of integrity in the process. Here's an idea: Somebody must be willing to step forward and create a script which can be fully automated to check for open relays. Generate the script signature, sign with a private key, and distribute script, signed sig, and public key. Run the script anonymously -- use anonymous relays, bogus envelopes, whatever it takes. Publish the results on Freenet, signed with the same key used to sign the sig of the script used. Obviously, the model needs some work, but I think if a public key is established as "trusted," then the results that are published anonymously on Freenet can be "trusted" with the same degree of trust.
I've been beating up on NEW.NET quite a bit in this article. I suppose it's because the deinstallation of their component trashed the IP stack on my Windows 2000 system and it took me a half day to put it back together again. What the hell were they thinking when they stuffed a buggy service deep into my IP stack without telling me?
What the hell were you thinking when you chose to use an operating system which allows third-party vendors to replace critical system libraries with their own libraries, rendering said operating system more unstable as time wears on? Instead of blaming others for your own ignorance, you need to take a good look at how much blame you have to bear for your own predicament. Nobody here will be able to help you with that one.
Just finished watching Schindler's List last night (I recorded it in 1997; this is the first chance I've had time to watch it). I was particularly intrigued with the portrayal of the Germans as an extremely efficient data collection machine. So much easier to round up those who offend you if you have good records to go by.
This appears to be the first step in Hong Kong to crack down on those who continue to flaunt the Chinese ideological line. It's so much easier to keep your harassment of political dissidents out of the public eye when you have names, addresses, etc.
And anybody who voluntarily participates in such a program should really stop and think about the ulterior motives behind the government -- any government -- maintaining an ID database.
The juxtaposition of "Netscape 6 is Spyware" immediately below this banner ad was amusing. I wonder if AOL realizes how this probably would not entice a/.er to download the latest/greatest Netscape dev tools?
(Apologies to George Carlin for the subject line.)
This will probably get lost in the noise, but something I've been thinking about is a "distributed/." Think of it as/. over Freenet. Hell, even use Freenet as a way to distribute bandwidth costs across an entire spectrum of users. This would help the Freenet folks, as well as keep/. alive.
Of course, this would have to be an independent movement, because I'm sure VA Linux (or whatever the hell they're named now) wouldn't want to lose out on a cash cow like/.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sorry you feel that way. Unfortunately, I don't subscribe to your educational theory. One of the first things I tell my students is to never take a word I say on face value. Instead, use what I say as a stimulus to formulate your own opinions, your own thoughts, and your own conclusions. Students are not robotrons, to be processed in assembly-line fashion. That model, the factory model, was prevalent in the early 1900's, when the belief was widely held that students could function in the industrial world with a pre-determined foundation of knowledge. It's a cookie-cutter approach that was abandoned long ago.
Education is moving in a direction opposite of what you are advocating. Students are encouraged to learn through discovery, through an exposure of many different viewpoints. I don't like M$ marketing tactics, and my students know it. But I unwaveringly defend their right to express their own opinions, even if it disagrees with my own. I provide them with facts to support my opinion; I fully expect them to back up their (possibly dissenting) opinions with facts as well.
You didn't mention where you live. But chance are, if you live in the US, I would prevail in my willingness to share my politics, my belief system, and my opinions with my students. I would hope that you have instilled, as a responsible parent, a strong belief system in your own children, so that they might be able to better appreciate their own beliefs through opposing viewpoints.
Not only do I refer to Microsoft as M$, but I make sure my students are well aware of my M$ bias by relating to them the underhanded marketing practices M$ engages in. The truth hurts, but I'm sure you'll get over it.
Oh, and I have a problem with dangling prepositions too.
As a high school technology teacher, I'm probably more incensed over the way M$ is trying to blackmail the education system than those who aren't involved in education, as I see first-hand the struggles involved with trying to integrate very inflexible software into the education system. But I'm also a taxpayer in the school district I teach in, and it makes me angry that our school district has also chosen to be a whore to the M$ brothel.
There's a related article over at The Register which exposes yet another nefarious plan by M$ to fleece the public: They are proposing licenses on a per computer or per FTE basis, without regard to whether computer or person runs, installs, or is in any way associated with M$.
I think it would be interesting if those who are sickened by these business tactics were to request from their school districts those EULAs and agreements which govern the use of software in the district. As a taxpayer, you're entitled to this information: If they won't give it up willingly, then surely it can be acquired via an FOIA request (in the states). I know our district has used passage of a $36 million bond issue to outfit our 50,000-student district with more M$ products...exactly what is not needed.
I plan on requesting our district's EULAs through official channels first, then through FOIA channels as a taxpayer. The reason why this situation exists in the first place is the failure of the taxpayers to monitor how their money is being spent.
Now, most IT professionals I talk to don't want to form a union (collective bargaining association)
But it may come down to that in the end. I belonged to a professional union (National Air Traffic Controllers Association), and if it wasn't for NATCA, the FAA would have treated us as indentured slaves. I don't think a professional organization like the Programmers' Guild will be enough. To get the attention of a company, you have to hit them where it hurts, and the only way to do that is to nail them in the pocketbook.
I don't think the Programmers' Guild will wield any influence in the long run, not unless they decide to affiliate with a labor organization and conduct a vote.
They are, I presume, going to laugh all the way to the bank with the added bonus of not even being required to provide whatever goods and services were purchased.
Check out this $1.5 billion subsidy Uncle Sam gave to IBM. What Oracle is doing is nothing new...it's been happening for years, and will continue to happen.
if any area geeks are looking to scavange old gear this might be a prime opportunity
Be careful if you decide to root through the recycling center's collection of old stuff. Many municipalities consider the property their own, making it a criminal act to pilfer from the recycle piles. My own town refuses to let you walk off with recylced computer junk due to hazardous waste laws: It would be like letting you browse through all the discarded pesticides and chemicals, picking the ones you want to take home with you.
>>It's almost impossible to keep students from loading software on University computers.
I'm not so sure about that...I teach in an educational environment, and they have the Windows boxes locked down tighter than [your own simile here]. Fortres is one tough nut to crack, and there's another one called DeepFreeze that isn't as difficult, but well beyond the average college student's abilities to crack.
I'm not saying this software can't be cracked. But there are some programs out there that make it damn difficult to install anything on a Windows machine (much less do anything useful, but that's another story for another day).
Any educational institution that leaves its machines wide open for the general college population without some sort of access control is definitely a likely candidate for your search warrant scenario. They probably deserve to be audited. But if you have nothing to hide, your machines are up-to-snuff, and you've already done your own audit, then so what if the BSA shows up with a search warrant? What are they going to find?
I've been informed that "blue lining" generally refers to pre-employment contracts (that was the situation I described). But I was also told most states grant judges wide discretionary powers when it comes to other forms of contract interpretation. One area of significant judicial interest is when the enforcement of a contract will expose or otherwise threaten trade secrets. I'm sure your university has on-going research they would consider proprietary.
The bottom line here, as others mentioned, is to get your university's attorneys involved, and do you own legal homework! Don't expect the suits to come up with the answers themselves. You might not have a law degree (or maybe you do), but the legal resources are just as accessible to you as they are to the lawyers.
BTW, did I mention IANAL?
...and that word is "outrageous." If your administration does not step in and put a halt to this egregious evasion, then you can tell them I told you they are a bunch of pussies.
Seriously: Where's the search warrant? How enforceable is a EULA with such broad contractual provisions that it forces a licensee to waive all rights to due process and freedom from illegal searches? (Before you naysayers tell me the Constitution has no bearing in this, check the facts: In many cases, BSA shows up at the doorstep with their very own law enforcement escort.)
There is a legal concept known as "blue-lining" in which a judge has the legal authority to water down, modify, or even eliminate certain portions of a previously-agreed-upon contract. I learned about this after I found myself the unwitting signatory to a capricious and completely illegal legal document. The state recognized the document as legally binding; however, the state also found the terms of the agreement were overly-reaching, capricious, and without legal standing, effectively nullifying the contract.
The reason why companies continue to write obviously unenforceable contracts is that they know the number of people willing to fight in court is very low. Most will simply roll over, expose their underbellies, and submit to being raped rather than fight.
What you all should be wailing and gnashing our teeth about is the piss-poor security model (or lack of security model) Microsoft uses that allows non-privileged programs to arbitrarily remove or modify system settings, programs, and libraries!
One could argue the same could happen on a Linux box running 'su make install', but I could reply that you are a fool if you don't run 'make -n install' first to see what might happen. AFAIK, there's no functionality to do this under Windows.
I have karma points to spare, so I'll throw out this little troll: If you use Windows, then you get what you deserve whenever you blindly install anything without first taking proper precautions.
In my world, "proper precautions" means never allowing Windows to be installed on any of my machines.
So if you dial your bank to transfer funds to checking, or dial your
voicemail to retrieve it, or send a message to someone's pager, your bank account
number and PIN, your voicemail password, whatever you sent to the pager - all
that can be retrieved without a search warrant by any law enforcement official.
So let's say a LEO gets your PIN for your bank account. Would this give said LEO the right to access the account? Worse yet, if the LEO was corrupt, the issue would be moot: You'd be cleaned out in a heartbeat.
I wonder how long it will be before someone comes up with a digital scrambler for secure communications...a pay-per-call "anonymizer" service designed to obfuscate called numbers...hacks to obfuscate one's own phone number...or would all of these be prohibited by the DMCA?
What Lycoris does that none of the other Linux distros really do is limit your options (maybe some do
but why nitpick).
I've long made the argument that Linux will have to be "dumbed down" to appeal to the masses. But this doesn't need to be done at the expense of those of us who do, in fact, enjoy being innundated by millions of different configuration permutations.
I believe this is where Microsoft went very wrong: Creating a "one size fits all" environment which deliberately obfuscates the ability to perform custom configurations. Had Microsoft had the foresight to include both "the masses" and the rest of us (geeks), maybe we wouldn't be sitting here on
How does this help each user keep track of a large number of passwords? What you have here is a centralized NIS-like database of passwords, but it does nothing to help a user remember what password goes with what machine. Also, this seems like an incredible security risk, putting all your chips down on the bet that you can create a super-secure password server that will never be broken. What happens if you're wrong, or make a mistake?
Why not use one or two well-built passwords (mixed case, punctuation, etc.) and then modify it for each host you need access to...so if you have hosts moe, larry, and curly, then your passwords for each would look something like
y 3,3IkshX476
moe.xy3,3IkshX476
larry.xy3,3IkshX476
curly.x
Some might argue this is inherently insecure...but I maintain if a password is sufficiently "secure" in terms of randomness, then this method would be no less secure than generating three other random passwords.
The drawback, of course, is that if one password is cracked, you've left yourself wide open...so start with a password you're convinced is secure!
Of course, the better way is some sort of authentication scheme using something like ssh and PKI, which is available on the platforms you mention. But now, you have to worry about securing your private key...to me, it's 6 of one half dozen of the other. Either secure your password or secure your key, because either one stands to be compromized.
Please, Hemos -- enlighten us with your infinite wisdom, instead of demonstrating your prowess with cheap throwaway lines. Immediate changes to what?
Posting unsubstantiated crap like this (your comments, not the article) does nothing to elevate your status in the eyes of...whomever. It does, however, make you appear as a holier-than-thou know-it-all, one of those guys at work that try to lead you to believe they know more than they really do.
Guess that's the end of my moderation privileges...
...about the Nethack tournament here, starts on Halloween. I've never played the tournament, but all this hype here will probably get me started!
...is a magnet.
(Accidently hit the Submit button before I was through!)
My thought continues:
Isn't this the reason why distributed networks like Freenet and the like exist? Wouldn't this material be better "hosted" on a distributed network that isn't subject to legal threats?
I'm sure there are mirrors of the offending pages that have been censored by Google...maybe these need to be archived for posterity on Freenet!
...before Operation Clambake is censored into oblivion?
...as long as individuals and other non-corporate entities run them. Why? Because we've seen how painfully easy it is for corporate or well-heeled individuals to apply pressure (usually monetary) against these individuals.
The solution is to make this process as anonymous as possible, yet maintain some degree of integrity in the process. Here's an idea: Somebody must be willing to step forward and create a script which can be fully automated to check for open relays. Generate the script signature, sign with a private key, and distribute script, signed sig, and public key. Run the script anonymously -- use anonymous relays, bogus envelopes, whatever it takes. Publish the results on Freenet, signed with the same key used to sign the sig of the script used. Obviously, the model needs some work, but I think if a public key is established as "trusted," then the results that are published anonymously on Freenet can be "trusted" with the same degree of trust.
Or something like that...
What the hell were you thinking when you chose to use an operating system which allows third-party vendors to replace critical system libraries with their own libraries, rendering said operating system more unstable as time wears on? Instead of blaming others for your own ignorance, you need to take a good look at how much blame you have to bear for your own predicament. Nobody here will be able to help you with that one.
Just finished watching Schindler's List last night (I recorded it in 1997; this is the first chance I've had time to watch it). I was particularly intrigued with the portrayal of the Germans as an extremely efficient data collection machine. So much easier to round up those who offend you if you have good records to go by.
This appears to be the first step in Hong Kong to crack down on those who continue to flaunt the Chinese ideological line. It's so much easier to keep your harassment of political dissidents out of the public eye when you have names, addresses, etc.
And anybody who voluntarily participates in such a program should really stop and think about the ulterior motives behind the government -- any government -- maintaining an ID database.
The juxtaposition of "Netscape 6 is Spyware" immediately below this banner ad was amusing. I wonder if AOL realizes how this probably would not entice a /.er to download the latest/greatest Netscape dev tools?
(Apologies to George Carlin for the subject line.)
This will probably get lost in the noise, but something I've been thinking about is a "distributed /." Think of it as /. over Freenet. Hell, even use Freenet as a way to distribute bandwidth costs across an entire spectrum of users. This would help the Freenet folks, as well as keep /. alive.
/.
Of course, this would have to be an independent movement, because I'm sure VA Linux (or whatever the hell they're named now) wouldn't want to lose out on a cash cow like
The best damn browser is still Lynx, hands down! Why not live in the fast lane?