Exactly. In the email sent to Theo, Scott Lowe isn't identified as one of the OpenBSD contributors accused of inserting the alleged backdoor.
He is "accused" of advocating OpenBSD while being on the FBI payroll. Which shouldn't matter anyway since that alone does not confirm a backdoor was actually inserted.
Yes but that depended on European customers initially being part of their income. The script kiddies of ANON need to be a contributing factor to Amazon's revenue stream before a boycott will even register an effect. Ceasing to do business where it was rarely done to begin with would look like business as usual to Amazon.
I don't think the point was that they could "decrypt" obvious passwords. I think the actual point is the fact that real people are STILL using obvious passwords!
Either they are naive and think their account won't get hijacked or they don't care since the account was likely just created to make one comment in the forums and doesn't matter.
But wait... I'm confused... Aren't we at slashdot supposed to be upset because the patent system doesn't enable people to innovate on existing inventions... They are so broad that no one can solve the same problem in different ways...
Now we're upset that this kid did get to improve on an existing invention? I'd be willing to bet you could get a patent on a wall plate shelf with the shelves off to the side of the outlets. Unless this post now constitutes prior art...
I would argue it should be as simple as turning it upside down. If that wasn't listed in the claims of the original invention, shouldn't it be fair game for anyone else?
Only the first link is similar to the kid's "invention" because it is the only one that is a replacement wall plate. The kid did improve on the invention by placing the shelf "above" the outlets instead of below so you can actually stack things on the shelf without blocking the outlets. Of course IANAPL but the kid's idea is probably sufficiently different from the first link that neither infringe on each other's "IP". I mean he didn't patent "wall plate shelves" (overly broad) but only his "design" of the wall plate shelf (specific)...
Correct. And at the end of TFA they state shipping is responsible for 3.5% to 4% of all "climate change emissions." Where the other 96% comes from... only Oracle Al (Gore) can say...
My dog is also clueless and she's 11. She constantly gets her leash tangled around our deck chairs and table legs, face plants into the screen door if we don't open it fast enough and barks when she hears a doorbell on TV even if it's completely different from our own...
It wasn't pushed hard because that angle would only have been relevant had SCO actually owned the UNIX copyright. The case never got that far. It had to be determined first, who owned the UNIX copyright. Then, it had to be determined if Linux in fact contained UNIX code. Then, if so, whether or not it was legally contributed to Linux and distributable under the GPL.
The only one of those three things that was determined in the courts was the owner of the copyrights. There hasn't been any ruling on whether or not UNIX code is in Linux. It has been determined that Novell owns the disputed rights and Novell has not had any problems distributing SUSE regardless of what code it may or may not contain.
Given that, the "they were shipping Linux" angle may actually be relevant going forward. Of course IANAL... Just my opinion as I see things...
While Novell never confirmed whether or not Unix code was in Linux, it was affirmed that they owned the Unix copyrights. If Linux does contain Unix code, SUSE has been distributing it for years under GPL anyway...
During the entire SCO trial while Novell was asserting it owned the Unix copyrights they continued to distribute SUSE. If Linux does in fact contain Unix code, it has been affirmed by the courts that Novell owns the Unix copyrights and Novell has been distributing it for years under the GPL.
Of course... IANAL but it would be hard to look past this fact.
Slashdot Mirror
Ever feel the prickly things on the back of your neck? That's them.
"I've been shot" tells the 911 operator a lot more then "the computers not working" tells the support department.
Yes exactly, "My computer's been shot" is much more useful information that should be provided to the support department.
Cool. But neither of these fill in the puzzle automatically once it has the solution.
...release unknown, ancient pathogens into the atmosphere...
which can't survive in our environment which has 1/50 the oxygen they are used to?
...so they can drill it next year to extract specimens...
like 2012? uh oh, you may be on to something. :-)
Yes, that is what the +/- buttons are for in Firehose...
Who whooshes the whooshers? :-)
Yes, I know. My post was also a (lame) attempt at a joke. :-)
What whoosh? That hack was from like 10 years ago... about the time the alleged BSD backdoor was allegedly inserted. Coincidence? I think not!
Actually, not even TFA does, only the Slashdot summary... which shouldn't surprise anyone...
There was never any OpenBSD contributor named Scott Lowe.
I don't see where Perry claimed that there was.
He didn't. But TFA does...
Exactly. In the email sent to Theo, Scott Lowe isn't identified as one of the OpenBSD contributors accused of inserting the alleged backdoor.
He is "accused" of advocating OpenBSD while being on the FBI payroll. Which shouldn't matter anyway since that alone does not confirm a backdoor was actually inserted.
Yes but that depended on European customers initially being part of their income. The script kiddies of ANON need to be a contributing factor to Amazon's revenue stream before a boycott will even register an effect. Ceasing to do business where it was rarely done to begin with would look like business as usual to Amazon.
But the collateral damage would be too high and piss off far too many other people.
Yeah that's it they're concerned about collateral damage... damned morals will get you every time!
Plus it they would have to use a different tool.
It's called a bunker buster...
This is the first thing I thought of. How long has VIM been doing this?
I don't think the point was that they could "decrypt" obvious passwords. I think the actual point is the fact that real people are STILL using obvious passwords!
Either they are naive and think their account won't get hijacked or they don't care since the account was likely just created to make one comment in the forums and doesn't matter.
Is the gun for just in case the label-maker approach does not work?
But wait... I'm confused... Aren't we at slashdot supposed to be upset because the patent system doesn't enable people to innovate on existing inventions... They are so broad that no one can solve the same problem in different ways...
Now we're upset that this kid did get to improve on an existing invention? I'd be willing to bet you could get a patent on a wall plate shelf with the shelves off to the side of the outlets. Unless this post now constitutes prior art...
I would argue it should be as simple as turning it upside down. If that wasn't listed in the claims of the original invention, shouldn't it be fair game for anyone else?
See now that is funny!! somebody mod this up please!
Only the first link is similar to the kid's "invention" because it is the only one that is a replacement wall plate. The kid did improve on the invention by placing the shelf "above" the outlets instead of below so you can actually stack things on the shelf without blocking the outlets. Of course IANAPL but the kid's idea is probably sufficiently different from the first link that neither infringe on each other's "IP". I mean he didn't patent "wall plate shelves" (overly broad) but only his "design" of the wall plate shelf (specific)...
Pretty good for an 8-year old if you ask me...
Correct. And at the end of TFA they state shipping is responsible for 3.5% to 4% of all "climate change emissions." Where the other 96% comes from... only Oracle Al (Gore) can say...
Only if you want it to weigh as much as a duck.
My dog is also clueless and she's 11. She constantly gets her leash tangled around our deck chairs and table legs, face plants into the screen door if we don't open it fast enough and barks when she hears a doorbell on TV even if it's completely different from our own...
Now that's a scary thought indeed!
It wasn't pushed hard because that angle would only have been relevant had SCO actually owned the UNIX copyright. The case never got that far. It had to be determined first, who owned the UNIX copyright. Then, it had to be determined if Linux in fact contained UNIX code. Then, if so, whether or not it was legally contributed to Linux and distributable under the GPL.
The only one of those three things that was determined in the courts was the owner of the copyrights. There hasn't been any ruling on whether or not UNIX code is in Linux. It has been determined that Novell owns the disputed rights and Novell has not had any problems distributing SUSE regardless of what code it may or may not contain.
Given that, the "they were shipping Linux" angle may actually be relevant going forward. Of course IANAL... Just my opinion as I see things...
While Novell never confirmed whether or not Unix code was in Linux, it was affirmed that they owned the Unix copyrights. If Linux does contain Unix code, SUSE has been distributing it for years under GPL anyway...
During the entire SCO trial while Novell was asserting it owned the Unix copyrights they continued to distribute SUSE. If Linux does in fact contain Unix code, it has been affirmed by the courts that Novell owns the Unix copyrights and Novell has been distributing it for years under the GPL.
Of course... IANAL but it would be hard to look past this fact.