I had never seen such single mindedness "my mind is made up don't confuse me with the facts" behaviour from US politicians.
I realize it's a popular opinion to assume Pai has been bought and sold but it continually surprises me no one in gov't has launched an investigation into his ties yet.
Sane people are simply not this zealous...
His "ties"? His resume isn't classified. It's fucking public knowledge who Ajit "Verizon" Pai used to legally shill for.
Putting him in charge of the FCC represents a level of deliberate collusion and corruption that makes mafia business look like an ethics committee in a monastery.
Seriously, anonymous coward, you need to take it down about 10 notches. We survived before net neutrality and we'll survive if the two-year-old rules are removed. There is such a thing called "competition" that drives the market, and I fully expect some providers to undercut others. This isn't the end of the world or far, far worse -- according to the rhetoric out there -- the Internet.
Competition? 40% of Americans have but one provider to choose from. The mega-corps will eventually buy up the rest of the market and collude together on tiered internet pricing, much like we saw with cellular services.
If you told the addicted masses today that every one of them would have to pay a $10/month surcharge just to access social media platforms, 99% of them would pay it. Ajit Pai (token corporate shill whore) knows this. Those that will benefit the most from dissolving NN know this. And you're delusional if you think the past even remotely applies now. It doesn't. The only repeat offense here is empty promises of infrastructure expansion will remain empty. Billions will go towards the ISP executive staff and no further, just as it did before. Greed is the only voice that is heard today.
Will change happen overnight? No. Death by 1,000 cuts is always the best approach. That way the ignorant masses don't notice until it's far too late to do anything to reverse a bad decision made by Too Big To Fail.
Do they stick a gun to your head to join and become a FB drone...? I don't think so.
Ever since it was announced, I took a quick look (without "joining") and determined it was evil. Never joined, and happy for not doing it.
For those who did, just get the f*ck out and become normal human beings...!
You do understand your stance cannot be sustained logically when you are the outlier in the data gathering collective, and stick out like a sore thumb because of the very thing that you claim no one is forcing you to participate in, right?
The "normal" human beings are now the overwhelming majority of society who is on Facebook. YOU have become the one who is abnormal, and believe me you will stand out. You will be forced to participate whether you like it or not based on the sheer volume of data gathering going on all around you, all the time. This is inevitable.
That might have been good enough back when they came out with 2% milk.
These days your Social Media products fucking better be gluten free, cholesterol free, non-GMO, vegan, kosher, contain no artificial colors, flavors, or fluoride, and manufactured in a facility where everyone wears hemp clothing, rides bicycles to work, and recycles toilet paper.
I don't see the conflict. Why not have the added safety and convenience of carrying a mobile phone even though it's not strictly necessary?
The problem with children having a cell phone with them every time they leave the house is they're often on the way to school with them.
This directly conflicts with your pre-mobile-phone era statements where you claim that it "all went fine" when children didn't have cell phones on them at all times.
Either advocate for the safety net excuse, or advocate for how students managed to survive outside their homes and in school for hundreds of years.
That all went fine in the pre-mobile-phone era and there is no reason why it shouldn't today, but there is also no reason not to have the added safety of the child being able to reach out if something happens along the way. I wouldn't want my children to leave the house without a phone if at all possible.
Conflict yourself often?
I truly feel for the children of the future that are raised to become this dependent on a phone. What's the point of teaching someone self defense when all an adversary needs is a cell blocker to incapacitate them...
"All we are simply doing is putting engineers and entrepreneurs, instead of bureaucrats and lawyers, back in charge of the internet,"
Shut the FUCK up, Pai. Enough of your bullshit already. ISPs took billions in taxpayer-funded government handouts because they bitched, pissed, and moaned they didn't have enough money to build out infrastructure. Greed N. Corruption took those billions, did little to actually expand infrastructure, and handed out huge executive bonuses instead.
Now, Greed has put a corporate whore in charge of the FCC to ensure that petitions to end NN would come to fruition, so that ISPs can once again charge customers/taxpayers internet premium tier pricing in order to rake in billions to pay for infrastructure, which of course those billions will again go right into the pockets of Greed.
We know how the eradication of NN is going to end, because we've fucking seen it before. The shit-stained cherry on top is watching them all collude together with pricing, and eradicate any potential of actual competition in many areas (when Google can't even compete, you know the situation is fucked.)
TL; DR - Drain the Swamp? Yeah right. Greed N. Corruption have never been worse. Get ready for another round of same old, same old.
That burden is often left to whomever is in charge of IT. In the scenario we're discussing here, there are two older IT workers who feel they don't need to learn anything new, and can put forth minimal effort to maintain what they are comfortable with and little else.
That is actually not the scenario. They most likely learned a lot of stuff in the niche they were working (Windows) on their own time.
No where does the article imply that they where "lazy".
Let's not bullshit here. Those that often maintain what they're comfortable with and refuse to learn what has become necessary to properly perform the job at hand are often found to be either lazy or incompetent/incapable. It is up to a manager to determine which, thus an evaluation is necessary to avoid wasting time and money.
And then again, in our time, so many people tell you to specialize, it is typical in IT that even old foxes only know a few systems (operation systems) and don't branch out into others.
This is true, but the duties listed were little more than desktop management. It even sounds like they didn't even bother learning that newfangled OS (Windows 10) to even properly maintain what little they know/do for the company. If the environment they're paid to support changes, any IT professional knows they also must adapt, because the concept of Adapt or Die will trump all every time. Specialists must also learn to adapt to the newest versions as well.
I for my part will never ever learn anything about windows... if outlook is not working, I call IT... from my point of view windows is a useless pile of shit, except for running it in a VM for an old game or so...
And this would explain exactly why you aren't working in IT. It also justifies the evaluation of IT staff, which is my standing point.
Right from the start, I was completely surprised that any school anywhere has ever allow them.
"I need to be able to reach my child in an emergency!"
"My child is special. He/She must be permitted to carry their cell phone."
The blame lies more with smartphone-addicted parents than the school. And schools often succumb to what parents want, not common sense. In reality, the parents are doing nothing more than creating pathetic excuses to justify paying for a smartphone for their 8-year BFF (a.k.a. their child)
We're also dealing with parents who treat smartphones like it's their left arm, so no surprise their kids consider a smartphone and social media access as vital as breathing.
If the company couldn't be assed to give them access to everything you just described, what the hell do you expect to hear back other than a big old fuck you? Company should have planned for retraining / upgrade-training and didn't because CEO/management are fucktards and incompetent.
CEOS are not IT professionals, so it's a given they're incompetent fucktards from a technical perspective. That's why they HIRE IT staff. The JOB of any IT manager is to ensure the executive staff knows what is needed and necessary to properly sustain systems. It's rather obvious that two older IT workers didn't feel it necessary to convey what is needed beyond what they were comfortable with, which was my entire point regarding evaluating them first BEFORE spending any time or money on training/re-training. There are likely multiple failures that have created this environment of ignorance, but it starts with IT staff who are motivated enough to know they should continue their training and ASK for the shit they need to do the job RIGHT. Evaluation will determine if that was caused by incompetence or laziness, which the results will drive a solution that likely has a far greater chance of success.
A security scan can be rather inexpensive to perform, and often shows executives exactly what the risks are of not properly running and supporting systems.
Ok, you're going off on them a fair old bit.. The question I'm asking is why the company hasn't had a training policy, budget and time to ensure their employees are kept trained in areas of requirement?
Because much like a LOT of companies out there, Security is hardly ever a priority until Bad Shit happens. THEN it becomes a priority. Properly maintaining systems to mitigate security risks requires a business to properly maintain support. That includes personnel. Chances are the company didn't know what they needed because they've perhaps been lucky, and Bad Shit hasn't happened.
What, you think it should all be training time and budget out of an employee's own time and money? That's not how the world works (and if you think it does, you've just bought into a nasty dystopian vision).
If training is to be kick started again, then you need specific goals, with milestones that are reachable in fairly easily obtainable steps. Then determine what training courses there are (that are actually worth something, not the "tick in the box" training) to cover those steps, and pay for it.
Increase the workload in the new areas over time until they're comfortable. Have them practice new skills in the test area (there is a test area for doing this, isn't there?).
Often times companies don't know what they need to maintain systems properly. That burden is often left to whomever is in charge of IT. In the scenario we're discussing here, there are two older IT workers who feel they don't need to learn anything new, and can put forth minimal effort to maintain what they are comfortable with and little else. That usually doesn't sustain business in the long run. Bad Shit will happen eventually to systems not properly maintained. Yes, training does need to be kick started again, and NO I don't feel employees should bear that burden personally. I feel in THIS scenario it would be wise to determine what kind of IT workers we're dealing with first before investing heavily in training. I really don't give a shit what kind of clout employees have built up over decades of employement; if you're not motivated enough to keep up with IT, then your value becomes smaller and smaller over time. Eventually even the most beloved IT employee is proven to be expendable.
Good will in a company is invaluable. It usually means someone's been doing a job of keeping things running, and has interpersonal skills, which speaks highly of them.
As long as you have a goal, budget, and work time that's dedicated to learning new skills, and a planned path to get to new (company relevant) technologies, then things will work. If that's not there, then the company is going to be in trouble over time.
Don't disagree with any of this, but a proper evaluation is necessary at this point to determine if time and effort will ultimately be wasted. If you spend $30K and fail to teach old dogs new tricks, that waste of time and effort will reflect negatively upon the one who failed to properly evaluate the chances of success before pissing away $30K. It will be the managers fault at that point, not the ignorant employees who are incapable of being trained to adapt to all relevant and necessary technology.
Buy a Mac for each of these guys to use at home. Put the Linux distro you're using on the Mac in a VM. Task them with setting up the machine to run remotely on the corporate network under both OSs. They'll have fun learning, and will then be prepared to support others.
The gift is also a nice way to reward them for their years of service.
If they couldn't be motivated professionally to learn Other-than-Windows distros which could have benefited them in their job, what the hell makes you think they're going to be motivated personally to learn it?
Sorry. No way in hell would I expend that kind of money and effort until I find out what the hell makes these codgers tick. I'd rather run a vulnerability scan across the network and prove to them that incompetence in maintaining every system properly will lead to disaster.
Doesn't this story come out every 15-20 years or so?
It basically says the same thing, that humans will never get better/taller/faster/more attractive than today. Then they say the same thing in 15-20 years, except that everything got better/faster/taller/more attractive during that time.
Uh, more attractive?
Narcissism and plastic surgery skills are not exactly traits of natural evolution.
There is a 1 in 3 chance that you will get cancer. A cancer-riddled society is a profitable society.
Your manufactured food supply is poisoned. We will never clean up our food chain because that would cost too much. An obese society is a profitable society.
Alcohol, tobacco, and other poisons will continue to be legal no matter the impact. An addicted society is a profitable society.
Death is no longer a natural event. Death is now manufactured.
Could we live a longer, healthier life? Yes. But you must find a cure for Greed first. Good fucking luck with that shit. Might as well order that snow-cone maker for Hell.
That's as it should be. You can do your own driving on the track. You fools are too dangerous to operate heavy machinery in public...
Adults handing heavy machinery keys to a 16-year old vs. legislators who actually believe that children should be able to legally operate heavy machinery.
Root cause analysis tends to make you wonder who the fool is.
Other than a lack of an upfront NDA, there is very little difference between this scenario and a security consultant being hired for red team testing.
Bug bounties aren't typically done under any sort of upfront NDA either.
Either? When I spoke of the lack of an NDA, I was specifically referring to one party here; the bug bounty hacker. I certainly hope an organization wouldn't be stupid enough to contract a security consultant for pen test/red team work without an NDA in place every time.
So I think the only real difference between this and business as usual is that Florida Man downloaded a bunch of company data. Normal ethical hackers would find the vulnerability and then report it without using it. At most they might do a small test to verify that it is exploitable the way they think it is, but they wouldn't proceed to access data they should not have.
Perhaps the test result data set was a bit larger than the average, but "small test" can be completely subjective. And to be honest, if I were being proactive about this and hiring a security consultant, I probably wouldn't tell them to hold back. I'd want to know exactly how much data they can exfiltrate and how long it took, in order to not only bolster defenses, but tweak systems to be able to better detect exfiltration activity.
No it was simple extortion in a way the parties involved can claim it isn't extortion.
Uber has a bug bounty program.
Guy hacks Uber and steals customer's data.
Uber then pays the guy to destroy data instead of selling it on some black market.
So that Uber isn't seen as paying ransom, they pay a bug bounty instead. Also the money being declared "bug bounty" clears the guy of being an extortionist or hacker, so the guy is in the clear regarding the CFAA (Computer Fraud and Abuse Act) and the unlawful hacking is retroactively legitimized.
Other than a lack of an upfront NDA, there is very little difference between this scenario and a security consultant being hired for red team testing. In both cases, a company has agreed to pay an amount of money to someone for finding their vulnerabilities. When a company is willing to pay, it's not extortion.
If corporations still feel that bug bounty payouts are "extortion", then get rid of the program and take your chances with the FBI. It's that simple.
All the cheerleaders are saying that the stock market is a casino anyway, but even if the market drops 30%, you still own stock. If Bitcoin drops 30%, you'll have to hope that it comes back so you can get your money out.
If you put your actual money into an investment and it drops 30%, you have to hope that it comes back up so you can recoup your original investment. That applies to any investment, no matter what it is.
It's all a damn casino. At the end of the day, a company crashing vs. bitcoin crashing can create the same end result; a pile of worthless shit.
Considering we're now talking about the breach they paid to keep secret.
The revenue generated from operating for months without the public knowing about a breach likely made it worth it.
If unethical behavior is proven to be profitable in the face of pathetic slap-on-the-wrist fines, then unethical behavior will be the default behavior. This is the reason we're seeing such a dismantling of ethics in large business today. When doing the wrong thing is worth it, don't expect people to do the right thing.
No women get hired. Period. Can't pay them less if they don't get hired at all. But then I suppose that would be discrimination too. Can't live with them, can't live without them. Then what the fuck do we do?
Pay every employee the same amount of money, like the military does. Earn more through rank promotions based on performance. Of course, then promotions would get political.
The simplest answer here is to subject every company to an annual payroll audit. You would have to standardize job titles (no more of this hipster "Director of Zen Relations" bullshit) so that an audit would fairly and accurately compare like job titles between men and women.
They have made the mistake of failing to compare...The reason bitcoin mining is necessary is that we need record keeping to prevent fraud in financial transactions.
And you've made the mistake that those profiting the most from financial fraud want that "problem" corrected. They don't.
...If you actually do the comparison, you see that bitcoin transaction costs (per $1,000 equivalent) is CHEAPER than dollar. It wouldn't work any other way...Conclusion, if we switch entirely from bitcoin to dollar, we will SAVE money and save energy.
Again, you assume those profiting from dollar transactions and energy want the "problem" of more expensive transactions corrected. They don't.
Slashdot Mirror
I had never seen such single mindedness "my mind is made up don't confuse me with the facts" behaviour from US politicians. I realize it's a popular opinion to assume Pai has been bought and sold but it continually surprises me no one in gov't has launched an investigation into his ties yet. Sane people are simply not this zealous...
His "ties"? His resume isn't classified. It's fucking public knowledge who Ajit "Verizon" Pai used to legally shill for.
Putting him in charge of the FCC represents a level of deliberate collusion and corruption that makes mafia business look like an ethics committee in a monastery.
Seriously, anonymous coward, you need to take it down about 10 notches. We survived before net neutrality and we'll survive if the two-year-old rules are removed. There is such a thing called "competition" that drives the market, and I fully expect some providers to undercut others. This isn't the end of the world or far, far worse -- according to the rhetoric out there -- the Internet.
Competition? 40% of Americans have but one provider to choose from. The mega-corps will eventually buy up the rest of the market and collude together on tiered internet pricing, much like we saw with cellular services.
If you told the addicted masses today that every one of them would have to pay a $10/month surcharge just to access social media platforms, 99% of them would pay it. Ajit Pai (token corporate shill whore) knows this. Those that will benefit the most from dissolving NN know this. And you're delusional if you think the past even remotely applies now. It doesn't. The only repeat offense here is empty promises of infrastructure expansion will remain empty. Billions will go towards the ISP executive staff and no further, just as it did before. Greed is the only voice that is heard today.
Will change happen overnight? No. Death by 1,000 cuts is always the best approach. That way the ignorant masses don't notice until it's far too late to do anything to reverse a bad decision made by Too Big To Fail.
Facebook is evil. Yes of course...!
Do they stick a gun to your head to join and become a FB drone...? I don't think so.
Ever since it was announced, I took a quick look (without "joining") and determined it was evil. Never joined, and happy for not doing it.
For those who did, just get the f*ck out and become normal human beings...!
You do understand your stance cannot be sustained logically when you are the outlier in the data gathering collective, and stick out like a sore thumb because of the very thing that you claim no one is forcing you to participate in, right?
The "normal" human beings are now the overwhelming majority of society who is on Facebook. YOU have become the one who is abnormal, and believe me you will stand out. You will be forced to participate whether you like it or not based on the sheer volume of data gathering going on all around you, all the time. This is inevitable.
Now featuring 1/2% less Social Destruction. YAY
That might have been good enough back when they came out with 2% milk.
These days your Social Media products fucking better be gluten free, cholesterol free, non-GMO, vegan, kosher, contain no artificial colors, flavors, or fluoride, and manufactured in a facility where everyone wears hemp clothing, rides bicycles to work, and recycles toilet paper.
I don't see the conflict. Why not have the added safety and convenience of carrying a mobile phone even though it's not strictly necessary?
The problem with children having a cell phone with them every time they leave the house is they're often on the way to school with them.
This directly conflicts with your pre-mobile-phone era statements where you claim that it "all went fine" when children didn't have cell phones on them at all times.
Either advocate for the safety net excuse, or advocate for how students managed to survive outside their homes and in school for hundreds of years.
That all went fine in the pre-mobile-phone era and there is no reason why it shouldn't today, but there is also no reason not to have the added safety of the child being able to reach out if something happens along the way. I wouldn't want my children to leave the house without a phone if at all possible.
Conflict yourself often?
I truly feel for the children of the future that are raised to become this dependent on a phone. What's the point of teaching someone self defense when all an adversary needs is a cell blocker to incapacitate them...
"All we are simply doing is putting engineers and entrepreneurs, instead of bureaucrats and lawyers, back in charge of the internet,"
Shut the FUCK up, Pai. Enough of your bullshit already. ISPs took billions in taxpayer-funded government handouts because they bitched, pissed, and moaned they didn't have enough money to build out infrastructure. Greed N. Corruption took those billions, did little to actually expand infrastructure, and handed out huge executive bonuses instead.
Now, Greed has put a corporate whore in charge of the FCC to ensure that petitions to end NN would come to fruition, so that ISPs can once again charge customers/taxpayers internet premium tier pricing in order to rake in billions to pay for infrastructure, which of course those billions will again go right into the pockets of Greed.
We know how the eradication of NN is going to end, because we've fucking seen it before. The shit-stained cherry on top is watching them all collude together with pricing, and eradicate any potential of actual competition in many areas (when Google can't even compete, you know the situation is fucked.)
TL; DR - Drain the Swamp? Yeah right. Greed N. Corruption have never been worse. Get ready for another round of same old, same old.
That burden is often left to whomever is in charge of IT. In the scenario we're discussing here, there are two older IT workers who feel they don't need to learn anything new, and can put forth minimal effort to maintain what they are comfortable with and little else. That is actually not the scenario. They most likely learned a lot of stuff in the niche they were working (Windows) on their own time. No where does the article imply that they where "lazy".
Let's not bullshit here. Those that often maintain what they're comfortable with and refuse to learn what has become necessary to properly perform the job at hand are often found to be either lazy or incompetent/incapable. It is up to a manager to determine which, thus an evaluation is necessary to avoid wasting time and money.
And then again, in our time, so many people tell you to specialize, it is typical in IT that even old foxes only know a few systems (operation systems) and don't branch out into others.
This is true, but the duties listed were little more than desktop management. It even sounds like they didn't even bother learning that newfangled OS (Windows 10) to even properly maintain what little they know/do for the company. If the environment they're paid to support changes, any IT professional knows they also must adapt, because the concept of Adapt or Die will trump all every time. Specialists must also learn to adapt to the newest versions as well.
I for my part will never ever learn anything about windows ... if outlook is not working, I call IT ... from my point of view windows is a useless pile of shit, except for running it in a VM for an old game or so ...
And this would explain exactly why you aren't working in IT. It also justifies the evaluation of IT staff, which is my standing point.
Right from the start, I was completely surprised that any school anywhere has ever allow them.
"I need to be able to reach my child in an emergency!"
"My child is special. He/She must be permitted to carry their cell phone."
The blame lies more with smartphone-addicted parents than the school. And schools often succumb to what parents want, not common sense. In reality, the parents are doing nothing more than creating pathetic excuses to justify paying for a smartphone for their 8-year BFF (a.k.a. their child)
We're also dealing with parents who treat smartphones like it's their left arm, so no surprise their kids consider a smartphone and social media access as vital as breathing.
If the company couldn't be assed to give them access to everything you just described, what the hell do you expect to hear back other than a big old fuck you? Company should have planned for retraining / upgrade-training and didn't because CEO/management are fucktards and incompetent.
CEOS are not IT professionals, so it's a given they're incompetent fucktards from a technical perspective. That's why they HIRE IT staff. The JOB of any IT manager is to ensure the executive staff knows what is needed and necessary to properly sustain systems. It's rather obvious that two older IT workers didn't feel it necessary to convey what is needed beyond what they were comfortable with, which was my entire point regarding evaluating them first BEFORE spending any time or money on training/re-training. There are likely multiple failures that have created this environment of ignorance, but it starts with IT staff who are motivated enough to know they should continue their training and ASK for the shit they need to do the job RIGHT. Evaluation will determine if that was caused by incompetence or laziness, which the results will drive a solution that likely has a far greater chance of success.
A security scan can be rather inexpensive to perform, and often shows executives exactly what the risks are of not properly running and supporting systems.
Ok, you're going off on them a fair old bit.. The question I'm asking is why the company hasn't had a training policy, budget and time to ensure their employees are kept trained in areas of requirement?
Because much like a LOT of companies out there, Security is hardly ever a priority until Bad Shit happens. THEN it becomes a priority. Properly maintaining systems to mitigate security risks requires a business to properly maintain support. That includes personnel. Chances are the company didn't know what they needed because they've perhaps been lucky, and Bad Shit hasn't happened.
What, you think it should all be training time and budget out of an employee's own time and money? That's not how the world works (and if you think it does, you've just bought into a nasty dystopian vision). If training is to be kick started again, then you need specific goals, with milestones that are reachable in fairly easily obtainable steps. Then determine what training courses there are (that are actually worth something, not the "tick in the box" training) to cover those steps, and pay for it. Increase the workload in the new areas over time until they're comfortable. Have them practice new skills in the test area (there is a test area for doing this, isn't there?).
Often times companies don't know what they need to maintain systems properly. That burden is often left to whomever is in charge of IT. In the scenario we're discussing here, there are two older IT workers who feel they don't need to learn anything new, and can put forth minimal effort to maintain what they are comfortable with and little else. That usually doesn't sustain business in the long run. Bad Shit will happen eventually to systems not properly maintained. Yes, training does need to be kick started again, and NO I don't feel employees should bear that burden personally. I feel in THIS scenario it would be wise to determine what kind of IT workers we're dealing with first before investing heavily in training. I really don't give a shit what kind of clout employees have built up over decades of employement; if you're not motivated enough to keep up with IT, then your value becomes smaller and smaller over time. Eventually even the most beloved IT employee is proven to be expendable.
Good will in a company is invaluable. It usually means someone's been doing a job of keeping things running, and has interpersonal skills, which speaks highly of them. As long as you have a goal, budget, and work time that's dedicated to learning new skills, and a planned path to get to new (company relevant) technologies, then things will work. If that's not there, then the company is going to be in trouble over time.
Don't disagree with any of this, but a proper evaluation is necessary at this point to determine if time and effort will ultimately be wasted. If you spend $30K and fail to teach old dogs new tricks, that waste of time and effort will reflect negatively upon the one who failed to properly evaluate the chances of success before pissing away $30K. It will be the managers fault at that point, not the ignorant employees who are incapable of being trained to adapt to all relevant and necessary technology.
Buy a Mac for each of these guys to use at home. Put the Linux distro you're using on the Mac in a VM. Task them with setting up the machine to run remotely on the corporate network under both OSs. They'll have fun learning, and will then be prepared to support others. The gift is also a nice way to reward them for their years of service.
If they couldn't be motivated professionally to learn Other-than-Windows distros which could have benefited them in their job, what the hell makes you think they're going to be motivated personally to learn it?
Sorry. No way in hell would I expend that kind of money and effort until I find out what the hell makes these codgers tick. I'd rather run a vulnerability scan across the network and prove to them that incompetence in maintaining every system properly will lead to disaster.
Doesn't this story come out every 15-20 years or so?
It basically says the same thing, that humans will never get better/taller/faster/more attractive than today. Then they say the same thing in 15-20 years, except that everything got better/faster/taller/more attractive during that time.
Uh, more attractive?
Narcissism and plastic surgery skills are not exactly traits of natural evolution.
There is a 1 in 3 chance that you will get cancer. A cancer-riddled society is a profitable society.
Your manufactured food supply is poisoned. We will never clean up our food chain because that would cost too much. An obese society is a profitable society.
Alcohol, tobacco, and other poisons will continue to be legal no matter the impact. An addicted society is a profitable society.
Death is no longer a natural event. Death is now manufactured.
Could we live a longer, healthier life? Yes. But you must find a cure for Greed first. Good fucking luck with that shit. Might as well order that snow-cone maker for Hell.
Even if you are not using it for fitness, the notification and silent alarm features most trackers have can be really useful.
It can be assumed that 100% of people who would use a smart watch own a smartphone. And people who own a smartphone are rarely (if ever) without it.
Save your money and download a free app if you want a fitness tracker.
Is there decapitation waver that I have to sign to get this discount?
Only if you want to watch movies while driving.
You also receive 1000 Darwin Award votes every time you renew your policy...
That's as it should be. You can do your own driving on the track. You fools are too dangerous to operate heavy machinery in public...
Adults handing heavy machinery keys to a 16-year old vs. legislators who actually believe that children should be able to legally operate heavy machinery.
Root cause analysis tends to make you wonder who the fool is.
Those with such skills likely know it
Nope. 80% of drivers rate themselves "above average".
"Received 27 April 1984, Revised 22 May 1985"
I can think of a billion reasons why your reference study is worthless.
"Do you use your smartphone while driving?" is the only question necessary to prove how bad drivers are today. Self-assessments are now irrelevant.
Other than a lack of an upfront NDA, there is very little difference between this scenario and a security consultant being hired for red team testing.
Bug bounties aren't typically done under any sort of upfront NDA either.
Either? When I spoke of the lack of an NDA, I was specifically referring to one party here; the bug bounty hacker. I certainly hope an organization wouldn't be stupid enough to contract a security consultant for pen test/red team work without an NDA in place every time.
So I think the only real difference between this and business as usual is that Florida Man downloaded a bunch of company data. Normal ethical hackers would find the vulnerability and then report it without using it. At most they might do a small test to verify that it is exploitable the way they think it is, but they wouldn't proceed to access data they should not have.
Perhaps the test result data set was a bit larger than the average, but "small test" can be completely subjective. And to be honest, if I were being proactive about this and hiring a security consultant, I probably wouldn't tell them to hold back. I'd want to know exactly how much data they can exfiltrate and how long it took, in order to not only bolster defenses, but tweak systems to be able to better detect exfiltration activity.
"Pai's proposed net neutrality repeal says those requirements and others adopted in 2015 are too onerous for ISPs."
Disclosing the full monthly price is too much of a burden?
Explaining the penalty for exceeding data limits is bothersome?
Fuck you Pai. You're nothing but a corporate shill whore. We should be dismissing you instead of you dismissing common sense.
No it was simple extortion in a way the parties involved can claim it isn't extortion.
Uber has a bug bounty program. Guy hacks Uber and steals customer's data. Uber then pays the guy to destroy data instead of selling it on some black market. So that Uber isn't seen as paying ransom, they pay a bug bounty instead. Also the money being declared "bug bounty" clears the guy of being an extortionist or hacker, so the guy is in the clear regarding the CFAA (Computer Fraud and Abuse Act) and the unlawful hacking is retroactively legitimized.
Other than a lack of an upfront NDA, there is very little difference between this scenario and a security consultant being hired for red team testing. In both cases, a company has agreed to pay an amount of money to someone for finding their vulnerabilities. When a company is willing to pay, it's not extortion.
If corporations still feel that bug bounty payouts are "extortion", then get rid of the program and take your chances with the FBI. It's that simple.
All the cheerleaders are saying that the stock market is a casino anyway, but even if the market drops 30%, you still own stock. If Bitcoin drops 30%, you'll have to hope that it comes back so you can get your money out.
If you put your actual money into an investment and it drops 30%, you have to hope that it comes back up so you can recoup your original investment. That applies to any investment, no matter what it is.
It's all a damn casino. At the end of the day, a company crashing vs. bitcoin crashing can create the same end result; a pile of worthless shit.
Considering we're now talking about the breach they paid to keep secret.
The revenue generated from operating for months without the public knowing about a breach likely made it worth it.
If unethical behavior is proven to be profitable in the face of pathetic slap-on-the-wrist fines, then unethical behavior will be the default behavior. This is the reason we're seeing such a dismantling of ethics in large business today. When doing the wrong thing is worth it, don't expect people to do the right thing.
No women get hired. Period. Can't pay them less if they don't get hired at all. But then I suppose that would be discrimination too. Can't live with them, can't live without them. Then what the fuck do we do?
Pay every employee the same amount of money, like the military does. Earn more through rank promotions based on performance. Of course, then promotions would get political.
The simplest answer here is to subject every company to an annual payroll audit. You would have to standardize job titles (no more of this hipster "Director of Zen Relations" bullshit) so that an audit would fairly and accurately compare like job titles between men and women.
They have made the mistake of failing to compare...The reason bitcoin mining is necessary is that we need record keeping to prevent fraud in financial transactions.
And you've made the mistake that those profiting the most from financial fraud want that "problem" corrected. They don't.
...If you actually do the comparison, you see that bitcoin transaction costs (per $1,000 equivalent) is CHEAPER than dollar. It wouldn't work any other way...Conclusion, if we switch entirely from bitcoin to dollar, we will SAVE money and save energy.
Again, you assume those profiting from dollar transactions and energy want the "problem" of more expensive transactions corrected. They don't.