Comment Re:criminal intent? (Score 4, Insightful) 398
It is very much illegal. It violates so many laws it isn't even funny.
If even one of those pictures caught a kid with their shirt off for example, they just created kiddy porn.
Comment Re:Ho hum (Score 2, Insightful) 398
Where does your sister live? I'll send her a camera... I promise my intentions aren't criminal.
Comment Re:Run (Score 1) 330
I completely agree.
I have been in a similar situation, asked to grant access I really did not feel comfortable with. I stated my objections in writing, offered an alternative but stated it was my boss' decision. In doing this I covered my ass and did my duty, but was not causing issues. Most of the time they accept my alternative, once I was told to do it anyway, and did.
Your job as an IT professional is to present risk analysis and ensure those making decisions understand the consequences of those decisions, not to be a brick wall preventing your higher ups from making them. If you really disagree, quit. I have done that as well when policy changed and I wasn't comfortable.
Comment Re:Snitch (Score 1) 457
I love it when people say "learn your law" when they are so blatantly wrong.
If you tell me you were speeding at 160 last weekend and I tell the cops, THAT is hearsay, which is enough for them to investigate, not enough to convict for the simple reason I could claim you said anything.
If you write a letter and sign it saying you did the same and I take it to the cops, that is not hearsay, that is you stating something you did in your own words. Very different.
Learn the law before you spout off at other people for not knowing it.
Comment Re:lemme get this straight (Score 1) 179
There is a site I use that does similar things, and many of the campaigns have to be very fast as congress will propose and vote on a bill in the same day. If we cannot use email how will we tell our representatives how we feel about it? By the time a letter reaches them it's way too late.
If the USPS will deliver from California to Washington on the same day... or if Congress wants to self-limit enough citizens have time to figure out what they are up to, I'd be happy to send a physical letter.
Submission + - Where does responsibility for email delivery end?
cyber-dragon.net writes: So I have been fighting with Google for three or four months now regarding an issue my personal PAID Google Apps account is having receiving email from Yahoo! email accounts. I have no issues receiving email from anyone else, and the issue with Yahoo! is seemingly random, but occurs often enough (three to four times a week) to be severely annoying. Doubly so because the same message sent to an @gmail.com address goes through just fine. I have verified each and every email came from legitimate Yahoo! servers, and each error caused an undeliverable message to be sent to the person trying to send me email. Needless to say, being a senior sysadmin, I did quite a bit of research to verify the problem.
I reported this issue to Google and they requested headers from problem emails, which I provided. They then proceeded to inform me it was not their fault the emails weren't getting through, the legitimate Yahoo! servers sending email had somehow ended up on their blacklist. At this point I can't figure out for the life of me why this wouldn't be their fault, or more, why once they had their engineers verify it, they would steadfastly refuse to fix it. I had provided not only data, but a means to reliably reproduce the problem, yet they towed the "It's not our fault" line no matter what I said, refusing to escalate me to a higher level of support and trying to close the case several times.
As an IT guy and someone who manages email servers for a living I know missing emails happen, occasionally things just don't get delivered for whatever reason. I would like to think however when presented with evidence of an ongoing issue I would at least take ownership of it and try and resolve it.
So my question to fellow /.ers is this... at what point when you are charging money for the service of accepting and storing emails do you become actually responsible for issues in their delivery such as checking your blacklist against SPF records etc? At what point do you feel "It's not my fault" is an acceptable answer from an email service provider when emails are not coming through to your clients? Once and a while sure, but when it grows to one a week, two a week, five to ten? When does this excuse stop holding water?
Google seems to think at 3-4 legitimate emails bounced a week for a two user account this is an acceptable explanation, I'd like your thoughts as fellow IT pros and consumers.
I reported this issue to Google and they requested headers from problem emails, which I provided. They then proceeded to inform me it was not their fault the emails weren't getting through, the legitimate Yahoo! servers sending email had somehow ended up on their blacklist. At this point I can't figure out for the life of me why this wouldn't be their fault, or more, why once they had their engineers verify it, they would steadfastly refuse to fix it. I had provided not only data, but a means to reliably reproduce the problem, yet they towed the "It's not our fault" line no matter what I said, refusing to escalate me to a higher level of support and trying to close the case several times.
As an IT guy and someone who manages email servers for a living I know missing emails happen, occasionally things just don't get delivered for whatever reason. I would like to think however when presented with evidence of an ongoing issue I would at least take ownership of it and try and resolve it.
So my question to fellow
Google seems to think at 3-4 legitimate emails bounced a week for a two user account this is an acceptable explanation, I'd like your thoughts as fellow IT pros and consumers.
Comment Re:iDon't have the app you want (Score 1) 386
Actually most developers are very frustrated with the Android market place thus you will get more apps on the iTunes marketplace.
My company has been working with a major motion picture studio who can't make the app tore work, and going to their app in the the store crashes the market on the phone.
If Google can't make this work for a billion dollar a year movie studio what prayer do little developers have?
Comment Re:Very well said (Score 1) 386
Much has been made about that report for sure... but has anyone actually read the press release?
It isn't even based off real sales numbers, it was based on 150k phone surveys.
Android fanboys were so happy about the announcement they never looked to see it was meaningless data.
Comment Re:Wrong or right (Score 4, Informative) 386
you don't like iTunes that's fine... but what rock have you been hiding under that you don't know Apple removed the DRM the second they were allowed to?
Comment Re:Proof that being more open = more sales (Score 1) 668
Or proof that being a new phone gets you attention. They don't tell you most andriod phones were sold last quarter. Once they are both six months old see what happens.
Google fanboys will buy android the minute it comes out same as apple fanboys will buy iPhones.
Comment Re:Apple (Score 1) 668
To access an android phone you have to link it to a Google account... you download apps from the google app store... This is this different than linking to an iTunes account and downloading from the apple apps store how?
Comment Re:Apple (Score 1) 668
Those numbers are about 6 years old... get new ones you want to make such a statement.
Comment Re:Future Announcement: Adobe Creative Suite 6 (Score 1) 944
Adobe is not suicidal, they have a huge market on OS X which has no desire to be forced onto windows.
No business will open the door to a market for potential competition when they can hang on to it.
Comment Re:Nothingtoseeheremovealong (Score 1) 853
No you are a moron who can't read. $20 + $5 wallet = $25, under the $100 requirement.
If you found $150 then yes, you are a thief according to the law. You may disagree with the law, that is your right, but you're still a thief.
Comment Re:Nothingtoseeheremovealong (Score 1, Insightful) 853
Justice will be served to the idiot Gizmodo guys who think they can ignore the law and hide behind the claim of being a news organization in hopes they will be given the same protection as a real news outlet.
This behavior just proves they are irresponsible, as if we didn't already know that after their trade show stunt. They whine and complain about not being taken seriously, well this is why. They are like a 13 year old kid who jumps up and down throwing a tantrum because they're not being treated as an adult.
The worst part is there ARE online journalists who are trying to do it right, and these jerks hurt their efforts and credibility.
