It's still the case for me, I am going to negotiate that the terms are changed. It's ridiculous. I understand if the product I'm working on is a conflict of interest, but if it's nothing related to my current employers field why should they own it?
Because they want to own all your ideas. I think it a) ensures they don’t pass on a great idea like HP and apple, and b) means they have the best productive hours of your day since outside work is disincentivized.
Many silicon valley giants were built off of moonlighters who quit their day job to build companies who later ate that day job, and the company would much rather promote you for new work than potentially miss out.
I just posted the HP/Apple example as it came to mind, but I think a clause like that was already in place at the time and HP explicitly said "we dont want it".
For negotiating, if it's a big company there's no way that they will negotiate that. You need to weigh whether or not what you are doing will grow large enough that they will care. If you setup a website and make $1000/mo they won't care. If you start running the next Uber while you work there, they will.
Our website and 2 of our client websites have been compromised like this in the last couple of weeks and they are all across different hosting providers (Zen Hosting and Unlimited Web hosting)
Here is a link to the code we found injected into the index page on our FTP and my attempt at decoding it.. interestingly enough it does relay to javaterm.com as the authors comprimsed site does as well..
We are fairly certain it wasn't achieved through our code as one of the sites is literally 6-7 pages of static html content.
From what we can tell it only ever effects the index page in the root of a servers FTP. In my case all of the shells were deleted(Looking from the FTP logs there were 2-3 uploaded all with different names)
Honestly I don't understand why people get all flustered over email validation, I would probably use something along the lines of this just to check that the email address is along the lines of name@domain.com, obviously this could do with a little tweaking.
The best way to validate an email address is to send an email to whatever address is supplied to you, if it is a true email address the user will receive an email and it will be validated, if not then their account or query will go unused/unanswered and that will be down to them.
> Honestly I don't understand why people get all flustered over email validation
Multiple reasons, and, yes, context is important.
Landing Page: You have one, and ONLY ONE, opportunity to capture a potential new customer's contact info. If they make a mistake entering their email and you didn't catch it you'll loose them forever. You can't send an email to let them know they entered two periods by mistake, can you? They are gone and you screwed-up.
Every single potential customer is sacred. Thou shalt not loose them by being careless.
Forum signup: In general terms, if someone is visiting a forum it probably means that they want to sign-up. In this case, it is OK to make them enter their address twice, make sure they match and send them a confirmation email. They'll probably try to log-on later on and discover something went wrong and re-register.
While I said "that's OK", I also think it is bad form not to at least do enough validation of all input data, including email, to catch innocent mistakes. I think people who are against email validation might have that position because they don't understand it or gat bitten by a crappy regex expression and that is that.
Now your forum sign-up user is angry because they have to enter all of their information again and go through the process one more time. Who knows, they might make a mistake once again. While I don't have any data to back this up I would venture to guess that the drop-off rate for making a visitor enter all of their data multiple times is significant.
Payment Confirmation: Must check as much as you can.
From my vantage point taking ANY action that might loose or annoy a visitor is simply --to be kind-- programming. There's no excuse for that in my book.
almost $800 to slightly inconvience them isn't worth it, now if it deleted every single file of theirs then I have a few people I would do this to!
It does seem silly that they can't simply remove you from a team without deleting your account, I can't think of anything that would stop them from being able to do that other than not having the time or motivation to implement the feature.
I saw this while browsing around the internet, it seems like quite a simple Idea and is far easier to use than the current system of typing words. But I do remember earlier this year a company came up with a concept of having simple games the user had to play to complete their CAPTCHA, I'm pretty sure that within a week someone had written a program that managed to complete the games with a fairly high success rate. So I was wondering what some of the more knowledgeable members of HN thought? would something like this be easy to bypass with a computer program or is it really as secure as they believe it is?
In some ways I do hope it is secure as it does seem like something I would implement on my website especially is their conversion rates are accurate.
The real problem with CAPTCHAs is that people are paid less than $1 per thousand to solve them, mostly in 3rd world English speaking countries. To write a script to break every different CAPTCHA out there seems like a lot of work when paying a few bucks will do the job even better. I think this is an easy to use CAPTCHA, and they say it will work on any device. That.s good enough for me, as I type on my tablet, with tiny keys and fat fingers.
