Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:I considered doing the same myself (Score 1) 139

You shouldn't have to lock your data down. I can see GPL'd code and can use it and distribute it but I can't close source it and then resell it as a proprietary app and then say "hey if you didn't want me to use it you shouldn'thave made it available". That is the license we agree to. A clear license lines out acceptable use and it looks to me like they are trying to strike a balance between being solvent and user friendly. But freeloaders will ruin it for others.

I agree you shouldn't have to go to any extremes to lock down your own data. But when publishing an website online, there are certain standards you need to follow if you don't want people copying the data on your website. If they are allowing search engines to index their proprietary data, then they should have no expectation that others will not do the same.

Comment: I considered doing the same myself (Score 1) 139

The OSVDB went pay a few years ago. They have a wealth of interesting information and use to be fully open source however due to lack of community involvement they decided that the open source model wasn't working for them. If the OSVDB has a problem with people scraping their site, they should really update (or in their case - create) their robots.txt. I was interested in this data myself a year or so ago until I found out they wanted me to pay a subscription to access information I can view for free on their website and screen scrape for free if I really wanted to. Further more, I noticed that google has completely cached their site because they take no preventative measures against it. If anyone wanted this data, they could easily screen scrape it from the google cache and the OSVDB would be none the wiser. Why should anyone pay for data that the OSVDB has literally done nothing to protect?

Comment: Re:Now, for the other angle, is this treason? (Score 0) 367

by hilather (#44728459) Attached to: US Mounted 231 Offensive Cyber-operations In 2011, Runs Worldwide Botnet

Is there a line which gets crossed where every Snowden supporter would say "this has gone too far"?

I have a better question, how much will it take for the American public finally do something about their government that is committed so many international crimes? For the record, I for one do not believe that shedding light criminal activities could ever go too far. What's the old phrase, "Don't shoot the messenger?"

Comment: Re:Indian govt is just jealous (Score 1) 219

That they can't be the ones spying. Corrupt govt hating on another corrupt govt.

It's hardly hating. Given the circumstances, this will likely become the norm for all governments and quite likely businesses that don't feel like being spied on. I'd like to think this is a wake up call for all those people that want to throw their data into the cloud without giving it a second thought, but it looks like for the most part nobody cares. And apparently, anyone who does care and takes a pro-active approach will be labelled as a hater.

Comment: Re:The what? (Score 2, Insightful) 93

If you're going to attempt such a blatant slashvertisement-disquised-as-a-story, at least tell us what the fuck "The Old Reader" *is*.

I presume it's yet another RSS-reader similar to Google Reader, like so many others out there??

I enjoy using The Old Reader - I also just happened to hear about them closing up shop this morning, however it wasn't communicated well unless you read their blog. I'm happy this was posted up on Slashdot as it draws attention to the issue that they were considering shutting down their servers. This is news that matters to me.

Comment: Re:The reason a "cyber Pearl Harbor" isn't imminen (Score 1) 215

by hilather (#42671315) Attached to: The One Sided Cyber War

In the real Pearl Harbor, people died. Unless and until the people talking about "cyberwar" demonstrate that they're defending us against the same kind of lethal threats, there isn't a legitimate comparison.

I completely agree that the "Cyberwar" term is hyped up and thrown around too much. But an attack on critical infrastructure like Water and Energy systems through SCADA attacks could easily result in the loss of lives. Just as an example, how many people depend on life support systems that require energy in hospitals?

+ - Ask Slashdot: How to deal with corporate offshoring?-> 1

Submitted by hilather
hilather (1079603) writes "I work in the IT division for a fortune 500 company and just recently word has come down from the executive level that a large percentage of the work force must be offshored within the next few years. This seems to be a growing trend given that IBM has now offshored a majority of their work force. This is beginning to bother me as tactics like this are taking away jobs from not only my city, but my country, and I'm sure it would bother anyone else in my position. I've observed that some departments at this company are blatantly ignoring the mandate to offshore positions, and thus far have not been reprimanded. But how long can this go on for until the executive level starts replacing senior management with people that will fulfill the offshoring request? To my nationalist friends, my question is this, is there a more effective way to deal with mass offshoring other than to keep stalling the request?"
Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:Public opinion not relevant (Score 1, Informative) 107

by hilather (#39877091) Attached to: Mozilla Calls CISPA an "Alarming" Threat to Privacy

Checked out the link... interesting read. Interesting because, considering the plethora of stupid shit that man said in his 8 years as President, people actually bother to take time to make stuff up. Anyway, thanks for the update, I'll remove that notion from my vernacular immediately.

Wikiquote seems to disagree (although it mentions it was said behind closed doors...).

Stop throwing the Constitution in my face. It's just a goddamned piece of paper!

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/George_W._Bush

Comment: Re:Lets just hope (Score 1) 245

by hilather (#39805071) Attached to: German Court Rules That Clients Responsible For Phishing Losses

What? Read the article. The person who committed the act of stupidity is the person paying for it. This is the way it has to be.

If the banks payed for the stupidity of this man there'd be no incentive not to be stupid.

I work for an international bank and I can assure you we take phishing attacks on our customers very seriously. Almost all banks have an email address where you can forward phishing emails or websites to. I'll agree there is some blame to be put on the users, but the banks should not be off the hook. Banks have the man power and clout to actually shut these sites down.

"In matters of principle, stand like a rock; in matters of taste, swim with the current." -- Thomas Jefferson

Working...