Re: [Discuss] Govt Source Code Policy

2016-04-04 Thread Rich Pieri
On 4/4/2016 10:43 PM, Matthew Gillen wrote: > Would they? Most (all?) of those exploits involve you installing an app > that takes advantage of a bug in the OS to jailbreak the system, or > visiting a web site with a vulnerable browser, etc. What all these have For any version of iOS the

Re: [Discuss] Govt Source Code Policy

2016-04-04 Thread Matthew Gillen
On 4/4/2016 4:54 PM, Rich Pieri wrote: > Every or nearly every version of iOS, including the version on Farook's > employer's iPhone, has vulnerabilities that can be exploited in order to > run unsigned versions of the operating system. GPL Part 3 prohibits > using laws like WIPO as protection

Re: [Discuss] Govt Source Code Policy

2016-04-04 Thread Rich Pieri
On 4/4/2016 7:15 PM, Mike Small wrote: > There's no irony here. I like the idea of a GPL with provisions not > granting equal rights to scumbags who spy on environmental orgs and > black lives matter activists or to people who manufacture weapons. But > it's easy to see the mess that would result

Re: [Discuss] Govt Source Code Policy

2016-04-04 Thread Mike Small
Rich Pieri writes: > On 4/4/2016 4:05 PM, Mike Small wrote: >> That's a bit weak. You would only be liable if you in fact did not erase >> your backups and had some. So their definition would stand on a >> hypothetical present fact (that backups exist) and a hypothetical

Re: [Discuss] Apple FUD?

2016-04-04 Thread IngeGNUe
Interesting stuff. FYI, we went ahead and used a drive reformatted as exFAT instead! ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@blu.org http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Re: [Discuss] Govt Source Code Policy

2016-04-04 Thread Rich Pieri
On 4/4/2016 4:05 PM, Mike Small wrote: > That's a bit weak. You would only be liable if you in fact did not erase > your backups and had some. So their definition would stand on a > hypothetical present fact (that backups exist) and a hypothetical future > action (that the victim doesn't destroy

Re: [Discuss] Govt Source Code Policy

2016-04-04 Thread Mike Small
Rich Pieri writes: > On 4/4/2016 12:50 PM, Mike Small wrote: >> I don't know a lot about copyright, but I'm guessing being a victim of >> theft or warranted seizure aren't among experiences that "would make you >> directly or secondarily liable for infringement under

Re: [Discuss] Govt Source Code Policy

2016-04-04 Thread Rich Pieri
On 4/4/2016 12:50 PM, Mike Small wrote: > I don't know a lot about copyright, but I'm guessing being a victim of > theft or warranted seizure aren't among experiences that "would make you > directly or secondarily liable for infringement under applicable > copyright law." You are guessing

Re: [Discuss] Govt Source Code Policy

2016-04-04 Thread Mike Small
Rich Pieri writes: > On 4/4/2016 11:28 AM, Mike Small wrote: >> on a device they keep), without any autodestruction happening. When the >> FBI takes possession of a person's, especially a late person's, device >> and software they aren't being conveyed anything. They've

Re: [Discuss] Govt Source Code Policy

2016-04-04 Thread Rich Pieri
On 4/4/2016 11:28 AM, Mike Small wrote: > on a device they keep), without any autodestruction happening. When the > FBI takes possession of a person's, especially a late person's, device > and software they aren't being conveyed anything. They've simply taken > hold of someone's device and

Re: [Discuss] How to write .htaccess rules

2016-04-04 Thread Laura Conrad
> "John" == John Hall writes: John> You also might want to search for http 301 error, which may be John> appropriate as well and may not use mod rewrite. Thanks. This is what I ended up doing -- there's a php file that catches some url's that need special

Re: [Discuss] Govt Source Code Policy

2016-04-04 Thread Mike Small
Matthew Gillen writes: > On 4/3/2016 2:49 AM, Rich Pieri wrote: >> On 4/2/2016 10:20 PM, Matthew Gillen wrote: >>> That would satisfy the anti-tivoization and be within the limits of the >>> GPLv3, while still causing a problem for the FBI in this particular >>> instance. >>

Re: [Discuss] Gift for a 9-year-old engineer?

2016-04-04 Thread Dan Ritter
On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 07:50:17AM -0400, Daniel Barrett wrote: > > Any suggestions for a birthday present for a 9-year-old budding > software engineer? My nephew has been writing programs on Scratch > (scratch.mit.edu), a programming site for kids, and teaching himself > HTML and CSS. He also

Re: [Discuss] Gift for a 9-year-old engineer?

2016-04-04 Thread Grant Mongardi
I'll suggest a Digispark Arduino kit. Using the Arduino App they are incredibly easy to program and you can get dozens of "shield" kits with them. This would teach both programming and electronics. There is a starter kit for $17: http://digistump.com/products/48 Although I bought a handful of

Re: [Discuss] Gift for a 9-year-old engineer?

2016-04-04 Thread Brandon Vogel
If he is local to the Boston area, how about a gift certificate to You Do It Electronics Center in Needham as well as an afternoon trip there to explore and use the gift cert.? They have great electronics training kits for kids (and adults). http://www.youdoitelectronics.com/ Brandon

[Discuss] Gift for a 9-year-old engineer?

2016-04-04 Thread Daniel Barrett
Any suggestions for a birthday present for a 9-year-old budding software engineer? My nephew has been writing programs on Scratch (scratch.mit.edu), a programming site for kids, and teaching himself HTML and CSS. He also loves taking electronics apart and building stuff, and he blogs about