So, Julian Assange?
So, Julian Assange?
Desk, hard drive, and email are all things that are actually physically located/stored with the employer, or on their equipment. HTTPS traffic, though, is merely going through their equipment and should not be being stored anywhere by them. That's the distinction I see and sure they own their part of the network, which is why I said there needs to be a societal acceptance of what a reasonable expectation of privacy is on any computer network that other people are allowed to access, just like there is with not being able to take camera shots up women's skirts, etc.
If you are using an employer's resources to surf the internet just figure that *everything* you do is monitored. If you don't want to be monitored, GO HOME. If you don't trust your employer, GO HOME to do anything you don't want them to see. GO HOME or use your own internet access.
I don't buy this argument. What if your home ISP started snooping on HTTPS traffic? "Their network, their rules", right?
Nobody owns the entire internet; it's a ton of networks connected together. There needs to be a common societal acceptance of a reasonable expectation of privacy when using an internet-enabled computer unless there's a damn good reason not to have it, and "scanning web pages for viruses" is a pathetic excuse for potentially snooping on all SSL traffic.
What if work involves logging into websites with passwords? Is it OK for your employer to be able to snoop on them, or should that count as "personal" research even though you need it to do your work?
But beware Google Chrome on Windows; it uses IE's cert store.
Yeah, and also anyone who describes it as "HR" instead of "personnel".
Human Resources is stupid bizspeak that makes us sound like robots or something.
I think my point stands. Labour still didn't have to give them a referendum. What were the SNP gonna do - have an armed uprising? If you think that would've happened you're delusional.
I dunno, ask Tony Blair, who gave Scotland a parliament and an option for a referendum on independence when he didn't have to.
Is this to replace Facebook's?
The problem is how Britain's libel laws favor ligitive rich accusers
Do you mean "litigious"?
Google use ffmpeg quite a lot through Youtube. I wouldn't be surprised if they'd contributed quite a lot to the ffmpeg codebase, fixing bugs and performance issues. How much of this did Google's staff actually write?
Well how do you determine the optimal duration though? You'd have to have some way of measuring a work's value to society, which seems pretty much impossible.
I just went with a simplified version of what seems to be the Pirate Party's platform, which I agree with - 5 years by default, with an optional 5 year extension (I'd make them pay a not insignificant sum for it so you didn't just get all lawyers doing it automatically).
How about 4. Copyright that lasts 10 years before becoming public domain, and not an eternity?
I'm in Europe and I do like nuclear, so speak for yourself.
Finally: nuclear power can only provide base load anyway. You can't ramp it up and down to follow demand.
Ha ha!! It can "only" provide base load? So what other green tech is gonna provide base load then, pixie dust? We NEED a huge amount of base load electricity and wind/solar can't provide it, and it's too unreliable. We don't have anywhere near enough hydro, either.
A verbal contract isn't worth the paper it's written on. -- Samuel Goldwyn