|
Authored by: naka on Thursday, March 21 2013 @ 05:53 AM EDT |
Just wanted to comment on this:
[PJ: When you think of Microsoft, that's the first thing you think of, isn't it?
The highest legal and ethical business standards?]
Well, I can certainly believe that they were high when they thought up their
standards. Also when writing that blog post.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: ukjaybrat on Thursday, March 21 2013 @ 08:37 AM EDT |
smartcompany
osswatch
computerweekly
--- IANAL [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 21 2013 @ 09:02 AM EDT |
"Vp8 IPR (video) RTCWEB II WG meeting - THURSDAY, March 14,
2013." link [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: lnuss on Thursday, March 21 2013 @ 09:13 AM EDT |
Wow! This is a superb article, and should be required reading for judges,
lawyers, PTO folks, etc. etc.
Though I knew most of what he writes (up to a point), I don't normally think of
it in this fashion -- it really points up the complexity and interaction of the
various technologies involved.
Thanks for putting this in newspicks -- it triggered some additional
thoughts/awareness.
---
Larry N.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 21 2013 @ 04:44 PM EDT |
[T]he Google executive explained he went to Pyongyang on a mission
to spread the good news about the power of the
Internet. ... There’s no
proof yet, but many people in South Korea and elsewhere believe yesterday’s
attacks against broadcasters
and banks, which crippled 32,000 servers in the
South, have North Korean fingerprints.
Bloomberg
Looks like the N
Koreans are already perfectly aware of the
power of the internet. There's
also this bizarre twist:It is important
to note that this
attack worked only on computers with disabled DEP ( data execution prevention ).
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 21 2013 @ 05:07 PM EDT |
I have to disagree. Google was very good at being evil when they helped to
destroy USENET. They linked Google Groups to it, without ever doing anything
about the massive spam influx coming from Google Groups into USENET. And they
couldn't care less.
Today USENET is just a big garbage bin, not the least thanks to Google.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 21 2013 @ 07:30 PM EDT |
For God's sake everyone. It's just another RSS reader. There are lots of them
around. Just install one on your PC or tablet and read the news.
I can't believe all the people who blow hot air about cookies and privacy but
demand to give all their reading history to Google in an easy to analyse form.
Take control of your life and just install a reader like everyone else does.
I use Lifrea on Ubuntu (12.04). It works very nice and integrates well with
Unity (which is also very nice). If you are using a legacy OS like Mac OS/X or
MS Windows, I'm sure there are equivalents available for them as well.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 21 2013 @ 09:41 PM EDT |
I can't play this ... link [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 22 2013 @ 06:26 AM EDT |
On Monday, Andrew Auernheimer was sentenced to serve 41
months in prison for violating the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.
Auernheimer’s
case has received a lot of press attention, and I think that
attention is
merited: I think the case against Auernheimer is deeply flawed,
and that the
principles the case raises are critically important for civil
liberties online.
For that reason, I have agreed to represent Auernheimer
pro bono in his appeal
before the Third Circuit. (I will be joined by the trial
counsel Tor Ekeland
and his colleagues Nace Naumoski and Mark Jaffe,
together with Marcia Hofmann
and Hanni Fakhoury of EFF.) In this post, I
want to explain some of the issues
in play in this case that I think make it
so
important.
While CFAA is part of the problem, a larger part
is the incentives to
prosecutors to abuse the law. Carmen Ortiz comes to
mind.
While Prosecutors hold office by election, this sort of thing
is inevitable.
Waynehttp://madhatter.ca
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: jrl on Friday, March 22 2013 @ 10:08 AM EDT |
I was very interested to see this quote:
"Windows RT will also be a strong platform for tablets"
Strong compared to Windows 8? Strongly smelling?
For my purposes, it is a very strong contender for
the bottom of the list of things I might want on my
tablet.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 22 2013 @ 07:52 PM EDT |
Canonical and Chinese Ubuntu
See also
ExtremeTech and Kylin homepage (Chinese)
This story
has a few points for nitpickers to knock.
1. Whatever happened to Red Flag
Linux? My utterly non-scientific
observations in China last year indicated
over 90% of desktop machines in homes, retail, and including the China Rail
booking system,
run Windows XP. A few knowledgeable users had updated to Win7.
2. The "English" name of kylin takes the Cantonese pronunciation of the
Chinese characters 麒麟 (sorry geeklog will turn those
to html
entities). Pinyin is qílín, the first character pronounced chee with rising tone
is a mythical auspicious beast, the second character
pronounced lin also with
rising tone is a female unicorn. The Chinese government has recently tightened
its enforcement of the use of
mandarin pronunciation in schools and public
offices throughout China.
3. Kylin was developed by academics at the National
University of Defense
Technology, PRC, and was based on Mach and FreeBSD
(MacOS?). Given the current US paranoia about the role of the PLA in
cybersecurity,
where does this
place Canonical now as
a valid Linux vendor in the US?
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 22 2013 @ 10:37 PM EDT |
Monsanto&
#146;s Death Patents
Other variations on this theme
include pollen from Monsanto corn (similarly dominant in the U.S. market)
pollinating a farmer's crop, or seeds from Monsanto-engineered grains being
distributed by animals, winds, or waterways and commingling with non-GMO
plantings. In each case, Monsanto could have a cause of action against an
unwitting farmer by claiming patent infringement.
Isn't
Monsanto polluting someone else's fields in that case? Shouldn't Monsanto be the
one being sued?
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 23 2013 @ 02:40 PM EDT |
Prenda allegedly
distributes movies, then files lawsuits against those who
download them
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: tknarr on Saturday, March 23 2013 @ 06:05 PM EDT |
Judge says Xbox doesn't infringe Google patent
I
see PJ's comment about the judges trying to avoid the stupidity and the pain
that goes with it. IMO that's the problem. What I've found in my career is
fairly simple: problems don't get solved until they become a personal problem
for whoever has the authority to order them solved. So, the patent system allows
for stupidity that'd disrupt things severely for everybody? Stop trying to work
around it and rule exactly as the law requires, and block imports of every
single product that's entitled to be blocked under the law. Let the pain be
felt. I guarantee you, as soon as the politicians are faced with a situation
where the patent system is causing enough pain for their constituents, you'll
see the politicians dropping the patent lobby like a hot potato. When your
average Joe finds out he can't get the latest appealing Samsung or HTC phone
because Apple has a patent on a rectangular case with rounded corners,
supporting that will overnight become political suicide. And you'll see the
situation change.
Think "work to rule". [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: webster on Saturday, March 23 2013 @ 10:10 PM EDT |
Judging by the length of Nokia's patent list, it
looks like the
Monopoly cared only secondarily about selling
their OS on Nokia phones.
It
looks like some of these patents may be compromised if
Symbian can be argued to
contain any of their functionality.
Google should be able to defend with some
open source FUD at
least. Look at this:
The current form of
Symbian is an open-source
platform developed by Symbian Foundation in 2009, as
the
successor of the original Symbian OS. Symbian was used by
many major
mobile phone brands, like Samsung, Motorola, Sony
Ericsson, and above all by
Nokia. It was the most popular
smartphone OS on a worldwide average until the
end of 2010,
when it was overtaken by Android.
Wikipedia.
PJ wrote
about this and don't
be surprised if she spins a new article before this
comment
issues. Nokia let the cat out of the bag before Elop
and the
Monopoly. Have they developed an "Oracular Blind
Spot" of open source
licenses? Imagine their own experts
opining whether Nokia's patents apply to
Symbian as well as
Android with the same functionality. Can Nokia do ten years
of litigation if they are not a Delaware corporation?
When googling for the
Symbian license history, the following
appears:
Not Found
The
requested URL /blog/2011/04/04/not-open-source-just-
open-for-business/ was not
found on this server.
Microsoft-IIS/7.5 Server at symbian.nokia.com Port
80
Are they starting to take the evidence down? This is a real
struggle of the titans. Nokia is a
pawn. Take-backs are not favored in the
law.
~webster~
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 25 2013 @ 09:53 PM EDT |
Dear Ms Reno:
If you want to recruit anyone with real integrity and talent, you will need to
have Mr Holder and his team go after some executives with the same zeal his team
has with the "hackers". It might also be worth granting immunity to
and publicly celebrating and/or privately thanking some of those that hack into
notably insecure systems.
If you want to actually secure computers, begin with the idea that the
foundations of computer operating system security are, at the moment,
fundamentally flawed, and, without an upgrade to the basic principles, none of
the currently popular operating systems can possibly be made even reasonably
secure in the sense that the owner is certain that he or she is aware of and in
control of all activities of his or her computer. To even make that possible,
the operating system must fundamentally distrust as many of its components and
programs as possible and yet minimize the inconvenience to the owner. It must
also provide convenient ways of effectively filtering the noise that distrust
will create, and provide convenient and reliable control over every part by the
system owner. Simplification will be an important part of that convenience.
I am afraid this lesson will only be driven home by a major disaster. I hope it
won't be rendered moot by a second "Carrington Event"(huge solar flare
followed by geomagnetic storm) that destroys a big piece of the utility power
grid.
I speak as an embedded systems programmer and electronics engineer, with about
20 years of professional experience. I simply cannot afford to actually look at
and understand the source code for the tools I use daily -- I must ship a
working product.
This is not to say that moving people away from totally insecure proprietary
operating systems such as Windows that don't take security at all seriously
isn't part of the short-term solution.
However, I do not believe that any popular and widely available system is
designed to distrust, audit, and control the software it is running as much as
possible and is prepared to deal well with applications or other components that
get out of bounds, especially working applications designed to send out small
and/or steganographic messages.
Windows is simply too complex, and has a long history of viruses. Other
operating systems take security much more seriously -- Linux is probably too
complex and loads unsecured drivers, Android has better policies on top of
Linux, Chrome is probably secure if you don't mind sending your info to Google,
iOS is proprietary and demands a credit card and the answers to sensitive
personal questions even if you don't intend to spend money.
(Christenson)
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|