|
I've just had to install Firefox for testing a customer problem. Google search, get one near the top that looks official, and I'm taken to something called EZ-Download Manager where I am forced to Decline around 10 or so toolbars and other crapware/malware! Now I see how all that crap winds up on other people's computers! However, after navigating through all the questions, here it is, and it looks really nice! Now, excuse me...I have some bugs to find! 
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
|
|
|
|
|
When I want to download the newest Firefox version, there is only one place:
Mozilla[^]
I would avoid getting it from any other source, at all costs
[Flags]
public enum Bool {
True, False, ForSure, Maybe, ProbablyNot, Depends, NotDecidedYet, Undefined
}
private interface IShy { }
|
|
|
|
|
I accidentally did something similar. Except I misinterpreted the installation process and got all that malware on my work PC. I was so embarrassed and spent the next 2 hours cleaning it up. It even installed onto chrome and ie as well 
I'm still not sure it is clean yet... all I wanted was Firefox, firebug, and yslow. 
|
|
|
|
|
Message Closed
modified 21-Nov-20 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks! Since I am not seeing the problems my customer is reporting, I may need to pin it down to a particular release.
How does a spamware/crapware/toolbaraddon/malware purveyor wind up higher in the search results than the official download site?  Money?
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
|
|
|
|
|
First 3 hits when I google for firefox are ads. They're marked by an ad icon.
I tried binging it; only one scum sucker had bought an add at the top; and it was styled differently enough that it was more obviously something different than the content below.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
The easiest URL to remember is:
http://getfirefox.com/[^]
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
To get all of the best software in a simple installer, with all of the crapware/toolbars automatically remoed, try Ninite[^] - it's my one-stop shop
=========================================================
I'm an optoholic - my glass is always half full of vodka.
=========================================================
|
|
|
|
|
Ninite.com is your friend for so, so many utilities
|
|
|
|
|
Suppose I created some libraries at work that we use thoroughly because they are awesome.
And suppose I wanted to use them for private projects and maybe even professionally (just not at work where I created them).
Would it be allright for me to just copy/paste those libraries to my own computer?
Why would I think this might not be a problem?
First of all I used the internet to create those libraries. Very few code is literally copy/pasted, but the code isn't completely mine either (and so not completely my companies', or maybe it is...).
Secondly, I am the only one who wrote those libraries and the only one who knows how they work internally. I could re-create them at home in a couple of days.
I even took some code from home and used it at work, although there is no way of proving this.
For now I am fine with not having these libraries at home. If I really wanted them I could probably ask my boss and he'd be okay with it.
I think legally if I took these libraries and my employer found out he could sue me and I'd be in big trouble (although it might be hard to prove I actually took those libraries and not re-created them, especially when I change some variable names etc.).
I was just wondering how people here think about this, personally (as opposed to legally).
Does anyone have experience with such matters?
|
|
|
|
|
Generally, if you made those libraries on company time, on company computer, with company licensed tools... then you would be stealing. You have already been compensated for their creation (that is how it works everywhere I have been).
|
|
|
|
|
Pualee wrote: You have already been compensated for their creation
Yeah, very true. How about the ideas? Would it be a problem if I re-created anything. After all, I've been compensated for that too 
|
|
|
|
|
I think it is a gray area. Are you working for a military/defense contractor? Did/will the company create a patent around it? Are you planning to open source it? Are you going to resell it? Are they going to resell it?
There can be big consequences for the action. If it is a trivial thing and no risk of the above, you could be ok. Talk with your manager.
|
|
|
|
|
So a carpenter is only allowed to build one table, one chair when it's for hire and can't go home and build the same exact chair and table using his own materials?
No, that would be obtuse.
Of course you can recreate the same code on your own time using your own materials. But for your safety I'd suggest renaming classes & methods, etc.
But, you could also ask permission to use the libraries.
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.-John Q. Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering.-Wernher von Braun
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.-Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
ahmed zahmed wrote: a carpenter is only allowed to build one table, one chair when it's for hire and can't go home and build the same exact chair and table using his own materials?
Not if the design is identical to the design that he made for the company, no.
|
|
|
|
|
Carpenters don't make things (such as encryption algorithms), that if recreated at home and then compromised... could allow hackers access to protected data (for individuals, corporations, and governments). So your analogy is silly. Carpenters generally don't need 'domain specific knowledge' or have access to any classified or proprietary information to create tables.
On the other hand. If you make a very simple yet useful library at work, which contains no domain specific knowledge, is easily reverse engineered by anyone wanting the feature, and you do it with YOUR OWN TOOLS, then I think you are ok... as long as you don't open source it in a way the compromises the licensing of your company... and then again... as long as you don't provide it for free while they are trying to sell it... and if ... and if ...
the scenarios are probably too specific to imagine here, hence the line about 'talk with your manager'. If you are uncomfortable asking for it... you probably shouldn't recreate it!
modified 1-May-14 13:00pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Boy you really stretched the analogy beyond all reason so you could justify your "silly" comment.  
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.-John Q. Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering.-Wernher von Braun
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.-Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
ahmed zahmed wrote: No, that would be obtuse.
Except the law is not about absolutes.
Rather it is about how reasonable something is.
So if you do in fact create exactly the same thing then it would be up to the judge/jury to decide it if is "reasonable" if the code you created actually appears to be something that you created fresh or it a copy that you attempted to obfuscate to look different.
This of course precludes any existing agreements that states that one can't even work in the same area (regardless of when or how one does it.)
ahmed zahmed wrote: But for your safety I'd suggest renaming classes & methods, etc.
Not sure what that comment means. But taking existing code and renaming it is copying. And a reasonable interpretation would be that you had done just that.
|
|
|
|
|
Sure, but it's also reasonable that the ideas one uses to do one's work are also able to be used for your own benefit outside of work.
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.-John Q. Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering.-Wernher von Braun
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.-Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
ahmed zahmed wrote: but it's also reasonable that the ideas one uses to do one's work are also able to be used for your own benefit outside of work.
Unless of course it is contractually stated otherwise.
|
|
|
|
|
Again, that depends.
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.-John Q. Adams
You must accept one of two basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe, or we are not alone in the universe. And either way, the implications are staggering.-Wernher von Braun
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.-Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
Ideas are not subject to copyright so unless you've signed something that explicitly excludes you from using them, I see no problem with re-creating something similar at home, as long as you don't do it with the work code visible to you (to remove any possibility of copying). I've done something similar at work to re-use ideas I had working for one client in internal work and the consensus was that that is fine as long as you don't use any of the code you wrote before.
|
|
|
|
|
The ideas are yours. If you need those libraries recreate them.
|
|
|
|
|
Yep, you'd be a thief.
The only exception would be if they gave you permission.
|
|
|
|
|
If you create the libraries on the company time, chances are that they own them. I have this in place in my company - all work created using company resources is covered as belonging to the company. If you worked for me and took your own laptop and did your work on there in your breaks, then I wouldn't have a problem with you using the code for yourself, but if you did it when you were supposed to be working on my projects and/or used my equipment, I would be very annoyed at you taking the code for yourself. The practical example of this was the creators of Barbie suing (and winning) the creators of Bratz because they created the Bratz dolls when they were working for Barbie.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
