Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Youtube's shitty copyright... (Score 1) 121

by houghi (#47437087) Attached to: "Internet's Own Boy" Briefly Knocked Off YouTube With Bogus DMCA Claim

The whole issue is who gets to decide if the clain is false or not.
In Belgium the comany I used to work for we received several claims from SABAM for people uploading things through e.g. napster and other sharing programs (So this dates back a while) asking first for the name and address of the people doing this.
Legal told me to caugh it up and I told them no, because of the law on privacy. They must come with a legal order, otherwise WE would be punishable as a company. That was something they did not want to do.
Next SABAM asked us to block the sharing of content, to which we said no as well (unless court order).

The idea behind all this was that I, nor anybody in the company can legaly determine if there was a copyright infrindgement or not. I culd have a legal document of being allowed to stream Metallica's music and they just don't like that I have that.

It is similar to saying "I do not like that you park in front of my driveway." and I say "But that isn't your driveway. It is illgal poured asphalt." If we can not figure it out, we go to court, but untill then, I park there.

It obviously helped that at that time I read an official letter from the court letter that as long as no money was involed. e.g. people sharing music, SABAM should not bother the legal system. The moment money would be involved (e.g. burn CDs and sell them) they would be happy to help.

The courts should decide who is right and who is wrong (not commercial entity like e.g. Judge Judy

This is dated information. If you take legal advice from me, you owe me 10 quadrillian Euro.

Comment: Re:Who's at fault for this? (Score 1) 226

by houghi (#47417479) Attached to: Avast Buys 20 Used Phones, Recovers 40,000 Deleted Photos

My parents gave me an old PC they found because they knew 'I liked computers and stuff'. The machine was utter rubbish, but out of curiosity I mounted the 10MB HD to my system and looked around. A LOT of bank accounts and other details, including passwords were there within 2 minutes.
That right there is the reason I never resell my hardware, but rather destroy it and trow it away.

I read here plenty of posts on how to handle it, but most pass on the REAL issue. Security (even from PC hardware) is NOT a technical problem. It is a social one. As long as technical people treat it as a technical problem, it wil,l not be solved.

I would go even further and say that security is a mindset, not even a problem. People will think from their own point of view and think that if they would not do something, nobody would.
That is why still most hacking needs social engineering. (These geeks should use it to get women.)

Just try and see how many people will give up their password if some manager from IT calls them and asks for it. I have been asked and told then to shove it (in other words) and I am aware that I am an exception.

So as long as people do not truly understand the impact they could cause, they will not do anything. They will bnot delete anything, leave the keys in their unlocked car and leave their beer unattanded when they go for a leak.

Comment: At least no spying on Linux users (Score 1) 218

by houghi (#47417251) Attached to: Meet the Muslim-American Leaders the FBI and NSA Have Been Spying On

The Linux users are acremely fanatic in their believe. At least they do not spy on linux users because that would be wrong. Right?
And if it goes wrong, the USofA can just not elect those who do wrong. Right?
I also hear people quoting some papers written several decades ago, so that is worth something as well. Right?

(Not sure if people can detect sarcasm. Not even sure if this IS sarcasm or just really, really sad.)

Comment: Re:"machines will view us as an unpredictable" (Score 1) 553

There is a difference between humans as individuals and humans as a species. We HAVE created wars. We HAVE weapons of mass distrutions (although not always where we think they are) and yet as individuals we hate killing others in general.

As a species the reason we ARE number one might well be because we value other things more than life. As a species, we value the species more than the individual.

Unfortunately the wars, killing and computervirusses are part of being number one, because as a species there is one rule that is more true than for the individual: if it doesn't kill you, it makes you stronger.

Sure, that will cos a few individuals, but as a species it is all part of it.

Comment: Re:Non-compete agreements are BS. (Score 1) 272

by houghi (#47372275) Attached to: Amazon Sues After Ex-Worker Takes Google Job

In Belgium, unfortunately each time I left a company they annuled the non-compete part of the contract. Because basically what it means is that if I am not allwed to work for the competition, they must pay me a LOT of money. So as long as I am not going to work for the competition, they owe me.

Many people do not know this and think that they must pay the company if they do. That is only half of it. The other half is that they pay YOU for not being able to work for the competition (for a reasonable period). This can sometimes mean a doubleing of your income over a peiod of a few years.

What more often happens is that they are ok with you working for the company, but forbid you to take secrets with you. That for obvious reasons and it is clear for most but the stupid what secrets are and what not.

Comment: Re:Why do we have screen savers? (Score 1) 348

by houghi (#47368635) Attached to: Bug In Fire TV Screensaver Tears Through 250 GB Data Cap

I have never used a screensaver in my life. I either turned off the monitor, or I want to use it. I also never let it go out by itself, as I have a need to do nothing with a screen for a longer period, while still be able to see it. I do understand that others might be too lazy to turn off their screens when they leave for more than say 15 minutes, so the auto-off of the monitor might be good for some.

The only places I have seen burned in screens is where a screensaver would be no good. e.g. data and callcenters where the same information will be shown all the time.

That all does not mean we do not should get rid of datacaps. One has nothing to do with the other and we can have both" No screensavers AND no datacaps. So your wuation should be (as is often the case) "I would ask why we ALSO still have screensavers."

Comment: Re:A/B-Testing (Score 1) 219

by houghi (#47350875) Attached to: Facebook's Emotion Experiment: Too Far, Or Social Network Norm?

The reason is that they are not customers. Users USED to be customers. Not anyumore. They are the product that they sell. And like cattle we follow them to the sloughterhouse.
Even though we seem the same and are told we are treated the same.
Some users who are not like the others. Do I dare say that some are not as equal as others.

(If I were any good, I am sure I could write a book about it where I would make animals look as if they were humans. However a martketing study told me that it would never sell.)

Stellar rays prove fibbing never pays. Embezzlement is another matter.