No surprises here.
It'd make perfect sense if NSA submits bug reports to Tor for vulnerabilities it knows its competitors are using; while at the same time keeping quiet about the ones it uses itself.
Might not be competing search engines.
Could just be a SEO-trick where a company hires a SEO optimization company to remove the content of competitors.
Sounds like the article's discussing the way in which it's not screwed.
There are circumstances under which such rules can be waived.
I especially hope they wave them, because Tesla's almost certainly a net-benefit to California's environment anyway (by making the industry wake up to electric vehicles when traditional automakers seemed like they were intentionally failing).
(or maybe the lawyer will be happy - but the guy payhing the lawyer won't be)
clear who owns the code
Do you have an example of a good Contributor License Agreement that doesn't just sound like "do work for us and we'll pay you less than minimum wage"?
Wouldn't it be better to just stick to a mainstream F/OSS license; and he users agree to release their code under that license?
Does that suggest at least 4 countries with NSA-like taps into the data.
I like the Surface hardware.
The problem is Microsoft's habit of killing support and forced upgrades (remember IE6, Zune, Visual Basic, etc).
At least if they unlocked the bootloader, I could continue to run Ubuntu on it after Microsoft's whims make Windows stop working on it.
I'd happily buy one if it had an unlocked bootloader.
But as it is now, you're buying an expensive brick.
Sad? I'd say it's happy.
So many big companies locked themselves in to "microsoft IE-6 only solutions" - and open source advocates have long cautioned them against depending too much on a vendor that might yank support whenever management changes or quarterly profits dictate yanking support to encourage upgrades.
This will teach them a lesson they'll hopefully never forget; and look for cross platform solutions in the future.
concentrate on securing the network to keep China/Isis etc out of America
Seems that would be redundant with the Department Of Homeland Security's Office of Cybersecurity and Communications: http://www.dhs.gov/office-cybe...
Often at that level, "he didn't have access to" really means "the policies stated he shouldn't access that." It doesn't mean that it wasn't possible, just that it was outside accepted policies and procedures
Or I guess it could also mean "the guy who made the comments was never permitted to know the details of how much access he had".