Your data is not personal if it has ever been shared outside of machines you own. If your data can be used by someone else to harm you or others, then the insecure system is what is dangerous, not the alleged criminal. We're going to have to come around and face the facts. It's not the hackers that are misunderstood: People don't understand the nature of information.

So they're getting crowd-funded money to do all their testing to ensure no one can see the NSA's back doors they have in place.

If you want to hurt Card, don't buy his books. That's how he makes money. The film deal was done a LONG time ago.

Oh my, a very hyped up and expensive car .. can go ... a lot slower than other, cheaper cars.
Definately newsworthy ...
Dang fanboys http://tech.slashdot.org/story/13/11/05/173223/tesla-model-s-can-hit-at-least-132-mph-on-the-autobahn#

It's quick. But an Ariel Atom is 'very impressive'. 0-100, 5.4 seconds.

So if your last job was being an accountant with access to bank accounts, you left, then later your ex-boss contacts you and tell you to give the account information to the janitors. You see no problem with this?

Hi, I'm your ex-boss. I want you to give secret information to people who should not have that information. Just trust me, nothing fishy going on here.

I disagree. It's dangerous to give a blanket statement that all the work belongs to them by default.

What work?

I've been in several situations in which I participated on other projects outside of work which used not a single work resource. It's too damn easy to claim you did it while on site or using work property.

That's why it went all the way to the board one time when I steadfastly refused to sign any agreement with them since the language was so overwhelmingly vague and if I patented a coffee napkin idea at home it was theirs. Nothing happened since I they could not afford to let me go at all.

I would prefer that nothing is decided in anyone's favor by default and must be proved in a court of law (no arbitration).

A non-compete agreement does not work for me as an independent contractor. Unless you pay me extremely well i'm not going to lock myself out of an entire market.

Ohh, and I guess that since I only work in Open Source it's kind of a moot point. It's rather funny when I explain that they don't actually own anything I make for them at all, and I don't either :)

If they had physical access to the systems, they should have been able to reset the passwords. Now, if he was intentionally prohibiting them from accessing the systems, after being fired, then he was doing something criminal. If, on the other hand, he was withholding passwords while working there - and being tasked with security for the network - then he did nothing wrong.

It's interesting that this seems to be the prevailing opinion now. But when this all went down, Terry Childs was the Slashdot Poster Child. Why have opinions changed?

Not in anyway similar. If you take the keys to their trucks you are stealing but if you stop work there is no theft involved. If you want me to talk to you then that is work and I no longer work for you. You should have implemented a better system when I was employed for you. To take this into the real world, what would have happened if he had been killed in a traffic accident? The same procedure that would go into place in such an event should also work during a dismissal. If you do not have such a procedure do not blame the guy that you just sacked as that would make as much sense as blaming a dead guy. It is your fault.

Should we expect a lawsuit or do they have a licensing agreement with Nestlé? (It's very indicative of the time we live in that this is the first thought that came to my mind...)

"only the officers are in harms way,"
Clueless much?