YEs, it IS different. Mostly because Scientology is a cult, not a Religion. They have already been found guilty once of trying to infiltrate the U.S. government. There is ample evidence that they have also murdered several people in their care. They routinely harass anyone who disagrees with them, even to the point of launching massive campaigns to try and ruin those people.
They indoctrinate their followers with a bunch of garbage and then milk them for money. If they get the opportunity they then isolate them away from all others and brainwash the heck out of them. The whole Religion is based off of a sci-fi short story that was crap to begin with!
Scientology has shown, in the past, that they are willing to violate just about any law to get what they want. Any software they produce should not be trusted unless it is completely open source. Even then, I would want to compile it myself.
I have an 8" floppy or two around somewhere. Significantly more of the 5 1/4 inch (and who uses them anymore?). Of course I have the 3 1/4" disks around as well. Some of my personal computer builds even still have the 3 1/4" drives! THey are all dead tech though. So in essence he is right. You can not count on ANY tech storage device being around in 20 years. I have seen companies run into this problem. They HAVE the backup data, but no ability to actually SEE the data.
Still, there are a few choices available to him. USB drives are one he is considering, but I don't like it. They can only be used a limited number of times before they lose their ability to store and retrieve data (most people don't ever get to that point). It also would take a LOT of drives. A solid state drive might be a better answer. That way he can have his hard drive solution, without his fear of the hard drive failing.
Still, I would make multiple back ups if he is truly concerned, and one of those would be on high quality DVD.
Encrypt your laptops already!
Jeesh. I guess people will pay money for all kinds of services that supposedly keep laptops safe. All the tools to keep your information safe already exist, but people simply refuse to use them.
Encrypt your data and it will be safe (assuming you use a decent passphrase or key).
I would like to say that, as a teacher, I have not seen this. Unfortunately this is not so. I don't think it is a union thing, but it is still disturbing. Even at a college that TEACHES Linux (well, they teach Unix, but we use Linux, as they don't DARE say they teach Linux), I faced opposition.
The powers that be treated the class as a joke. They all belittled it, saying that while it was nice that we teach Linux, it is pretty much worthless. They are a Windows shop through and through. Even as my students and I continued to teach the power of the Linux OS, we were continually fought against. I, and my students, were told that what we were doing can't possibly be free, and that it can not possibly have real world implications. We would counter by telling them that the majority of web servers run Linux, and that Linux runs embedded on many of the devices they use every day, like TiVo, and routers. Still they claim we can not possibly be correct.
Even when the president of the school made me project lead on the computer scholarship project, getting out free PC's to students in need (running Ubuntu), we found much resistance. Teacher's were afraid that they would not be able to read reports written on the computers, or that the students would get in trouble for running free software.
The level of ignorance among the educators in this country in regards to Linux is amazing. I imagine that is just the way MacroSoft likes it. Meanwhile some of the best students are quietly running Linux, and are doing some amazing things.
I think Linux should be taught to ALL IT majors. Every semester I would get students sent to my class because their business has a Linux box quietly running in the back room. The man who set it up no longer working there, and the company doesn't know what to do with it, and are scared to shut it down because they don't know if it is vital or not! Eventually that school shut me out of my Linux classes (they had gotten very popular) and has them now being taught by someone who is not familiar with it, just they way they like it, non-threatening.
Ugh, I should learn to proof read when I type in the morning. 2007-early 2008 is what I meant, not 2006. I am good (if I do say so myself) but not so good that I can tell the results of an attack before it even happens!
I can't believe that they are just discussing this NOW? I was discussing this back in '06 after the first round of attacks in my Master's IA course. The damage done in that case was tremendous. Estonia basically dropped off the face of the earth for a week. Transportation stopped, Banks stopped, Phones stopped, Web traffic stopped. The damage was tremendous. I started thinking about BotNet as a military weapon, and the thought chilled me.
After all, what does an invading force do first when attacking an opponent? You take out command and control, communications. Normally this is done with bombs. Now, with a botnet, it can be done without firing a singe shot. Imagine what would happen in this country if the rail stopped moving, the phones and internet went down, and the banks closed overnight. Imagine that even news agencies came to a standstill. Imagine the panic that would ensue! Now imagine that same problem also in the military. Chaos!
I am very saddened that they are just beginning to work on this now. It has been apparent to me for a long time that BotNets are a very capable poor man's WMD. The problem about issuing warrants against a BotNet though, is that most people participating are innocent. You would need to trace it back to the owner, and that can be very hard if they are any good. I mean, who is going to coordinate all this from their own system? I heard online that the DoD is working on being able to make a physical retaliatory strike against an online threat, but you better make damn sure that you are attacking the bad guy and not some dupe whose computer they have taken over!
While I would not put it as "weak" individuals having a reaction to the vaccine, your overall point is valid.
It may be true that some people have had negative reactions to the vaccines. Much of the hype is overblown. People are blaming everything from asthma to autism on vaccines, even though there is little evidence to support this.
Even if it were true, the vaccines are saving FAR more lives than they harm, and by a huge margin. Do we want to return to a world where devastating illnesses kill millions when that could have been avoided? The same people who want to stop the vaccinations would be screaming at the medical community to stop these illnesses! Meanwhile those that are refusing the vaccinations for their children are putting us ALL at risk. If these infections get a foothold, then even those who have been vaccinated are at risk. How foolish.
It may be that we should be putting more research into the possible adverse effects of these vaccinations. Maybe we need to devote more effort into safer vaccinations, but the answer is NOT to start refusing vaccinations for our children, and put them, and everyone else, at risk due to some overblown sense of paranoia. The rise of asthma and other illnesses are more likely the result of poor diets filled with chemicals, and poor air quality because we keep trashing the environment, not vaccinations that are helping to save far more lives than they harm.
Yeah, I am tired, and the ideas kind of formed while I was typing. You know, I thought one thing and while I was typing was able to answer my own question, but other ones arose at the same time.
I know a bit about what I am talking about, but I sure as heck am not a lawyer. I am very curious though, to know just what laws a good lawyer could claim are being violated.
Well, to tell you the truth, I have always had a problem with this argument. Basically you are saying that there are much bigger problems and crimes out there, so don't worry about the small problems/crimes. Should we not care about the mom and pop grocery store that was robbed last week because the bank was also robbed? Should we not bother about the child who was molested because there are so many unsolved murders?
Where do you draw the line? If it is illegal then it is illegal. The severity of the crime comes out in the punishment (well, in an ideal world anyways). If you truly think that it is a meaningless crime, then work on decriminalizing it, but to argue that a small problem is not a problem at all because there are larger problems to worry about is silly.
Interesting. I don't think it would be copyright infringement exactly. They did develop a tool that essentially helps you steal things, though, I am not so sure if that is illegal either.
I know if I had a store and I sold items, and someone wrote all over my advertisements where people could get the same stuff cheaper (or free) I would be very upset, and I imagine I would have some form of recourse, though I am not sure that recourse would be in the area of copyright infringement. If it is, then any add-on or program that alters the display of a web page could be guilty of the same copyright infringement!
I am no legal expert, but I would love a lawyer's perspective on what law is violated here. I am pretty sure that there is one.
Already ignored. Google would be foolish to abandon Android. And as far as working on what he calls relying on "green" hardware, I thought that Android was also tied to the Open Source phone project. Indeed, if this is true, hardware compatibility isn't really an issue, is it?
The G1 indeed looking like a good first Android phone, though I must admit that the advertising for it is very poor. It leaves the user with little understanding of just what the platform is capable of, other than it can do google searches. They really need to ramp it up and get creative.
And soon we will see the next generation of Android phones, which I am VERY excited about. Motorola is coming out with an Android phone next year that is supposed to be G1 like, with more hardware features, for less money. Also Asus is planning on releasing an Android phone in Q1 next year, but who knows how long it will take to get to the U.S.
I ran a similar project. I worked as an adjunct professor at a community college, and I also was the project lead for the computer scholarship program. We had 100 donated computers for a local business. We made sure the hard drives were wiped, installed Ubuntu, and then set up the computer so that they could work well with our existing systems. This mostly involved setting the defaults for things like OpenOffice to save documents in formats that were easily read by other Windows systems the school uses. The computers went to students whose families did not have a computer.
Check with local companies. Many often get rid of their old computers. Download a live CD like DBaN to make sure there is no old information left on the computers, and you can then assure companies that you will be securely deleting any information on those systems.
One of my students also used to go once a month to the local recycling center and would pick up computers other people had discarded. Many people throw out perfectly good equipment, or they will have a Power supply go out, and figure the whole computer is trash, so they toss it. Grab the stuff, and it is usually easy to repair for minimal cost. You can also get help in these projects. Check with local schools and computer repair shops. Often you will find techs that are more than willing to donate some time for a project like this. They learn and also get to do something worthwhile!
As with most stories of this kind, it is skewed. Obama got more raw favorable news coverage, but take a look at WHAT was covered, and more importantly, what was not.
A lot of stories were covered because the McCain campaign brought them up. A lot of things that that campaign said needed covering, and fact checking. They said a LOT of negative things that failed the truth check, and the news spent time straightening out the stories. The fact is, the McCain campaign focused most of its effort on Obama, not on themselves, and the Obama campaign did the opposite. The end result is that there is more coverage of Obama.
Now look at what wasn't covered. Many of McCain's skeletons remained in the closet. Very little coverage of his role in the Keating 5. Very little coverage of his memberships in groups related to the Iran-Contra affair. Yet they DID cover every attempt to slime Obama from the McCain camp.
The press, by and large, did attempt to cover the McCain campaign, and for quite a while did the campaigns bidding (until the campaign lashed out at the press). Unfortunately the McCain campaign tried to make this election about Obama, and did it badly, giving Obama a lot more press. That is McCain's fault, not the press.
Besides, what do you expect when you attack the press? You expect them to get all warm and fuzzy over you?
I agree that the school is perhaps reacting too harshly. That very much depends on the totality of the situation, which I do not have. I only know part of the story. The ethical argument is also moot since the totality of the situation is also unknown. It certainly seems that the school is perhaps overreacting.
I was under the impression that the area was "somewhat" protected. Even if it wasn't, it is still against the law. While I agree that they should take it easy on the kid, especially if there was absolutely no protection in place, it is still well within their rights to prosecute, just as it is your right to do so if someone wanders onto your property and starts taking a look at the contents of your shed, which you forgot to lock.
Have you ever entered a bank when you weren't supposed to? Have you broken in after hours "just to look around?" Did you then leave a note telling them how bad their security was? Would you expect to NOT be prosecuted if you did? Your analogy is weak. Entering a bank during hours when you are invited to do so is different than entering after hours. Actually, a better analogy would be you entering the bank during working hours and walking in back and entering the vault "just for a look" without permission. I think they would prosecute you.
The law is quite clear. He accessed computers and information that he had no right to. HAcking into systems is not legal even if you "do no harm." How can you, or I, or anyone else prove there was no harm done? Sensitive information was accessed by this individual. That is harm in and of itself!
Would you fail to prosecute someone if they had broken into your home, looked around for God knows how long, watched you sleep for a while, then left you a note telling you that your lock isn't very good?
Accessing systems without permission is illegal. The kid should probably not be punished as severely as someone who tried to hide his access attempt, but he DID break the law.
I have reported many times about machines stealing elections, and being pre-programmed to do so.
I have also seen the voter blamed for the latest inaccuracies. WHen they vote Obama, and it says you voted McCain, the election officials are blaming the voters saying they did not use the machine properly!
Tell me, when a machine can not be used easily and reliably to record your vote, whose fault is it? One thing is for sure, it isn't the voter's fault! Design the thing to work easily and record a proper vote and you won't have these issues!
This is either stealing, or bad and lazy programming. Either way it is criminal, since designing a voting machine that is reliable and foolproof isn't that hard (I have designs that would work). Probably lazy programmers, and bad QA.
Business reason that they can't sell it in the US:TRANSLATION: They can't make it conform to the emissions standards now in effect in many states.
65 MPG. Sounds impressive eh? Oh wait, it is a diesel. ONLY 65 MPG. They should be able to get more than that out of a diesel car by now.
Ya, this is not new, nor should it be Earth Shattering news. What would be news is if spy networks didn't use the internet for data collection.
It works both ways though. There is a lot of information out there that isn't accurate or is purposely misleading. You may find information on the net, but verifying those leads can be the real bear I would imagine.
And that is your right. It is also their right to demand the testing.
I think this has arisen because of the nature of the job, and the nature of the quality of professionals available. There are a lot of people out there that have been doing their IT jobs for years in various places, and they even have certifications (I mean, how hard is it to study for a cert test?). This does not mean they know what the heck they are doing. A lot of times these people even get stellar reviews from their former companies because those that they report to have no clue either.
There are a heck of a lot of people in this profession that have been doing it wrong for a very, very long time. Kind of like management. There are a lot of managers out there who have been doing their jobs for a long time. They have just been doing it very, very badly. Unfortunately they are still getting hired, and doing poor jobs.
That said, I am not sure I would subject myself to this either. If you want to evaluate my performance, that is what the probationary period is all about. I doubt there is much in a manufactured interview test that could tell them much about the true nature of their work, but it does tell you something about the employer, doesn't it?
Here is the problem that the companies don't seem to get. Security is a balancing act. When you ratchet up security too much, user friendliness goes down. That has two effects. The first is that people do not use the product. The second is that it drastically increases the number of people that bypass the security.
This is the case here. The game is reportedly quite good. However the draconian approach to DRM means that fewer people will actually buy it, and more people, including a lot of people who wouldn't otherwise, bypass the security by downloading illegal copies. The DRM technique in this case is somewhat self-defeating. Now some might say that the company does not care, that they just want to ensure that they make money. However this doesn't ring true, as they would have made more money without the DRM. Many people who would normally buy the program are illegally downloading it because they do not like the DRM. The DRM development also cost money. So, in this case, the DRM may actually be a money loser.
Slashdot Mirror
YEs, it IS different. Mostly because Scientology is a cult, not a Religion. They have already been found guilty once of trying to infiltrate the U.S. government. There is ample evidence that they have also murdered several people in their care. They routinely harass anyone who disagrees with them, even to the point of launching massive campaigns to try and ruin those people. They indoctrinate their followers with a bunch of garbage and then milk them for money. If they get the opportunity they then isolate them away from all others and brainwash the heck out of them. The whole Religion is based off of a sci-fi short story that was crap to begin with! Scientology has shown, in the past, that they are willing to violate just about any law to get what they want. Any software they produce should not be trusted unless it is completely open source. Even then, I would want to compile it myself.
I have an 8" floppy or two around somewhere. Significantly more of the 5 1/4 inch (and who uses them anymore?). Of course I have the 3 1/4" disks around as well. Some of my personal computer builds even still have the 3 1/4" drives! THey are all dead tech though. So in essence he is right. You can not count on ANY tech storage device being around in 20 years. I have seen companies run into this problem. They HAVE the backup data, but no ability to actually SEE the data. Still, there are a few choices available to him. USB drives are one he is considering, but I don't like it. They can only be used a limited number of times before they lose their ability to store and retrieve data (most people don't ever get to that point). It also would take a LOT of drives. A solid state drive might be a better answer. That way he can have his hard drive solution, without his fear of the hard drive failing. Still, I would make multiple back ups if he is truly concerned, and one of those would be on high quality DVD.
Encrypt your laptops already! Jeesh. I guess people will pay money for all kinds of services that supposedly keep laptops safe. All the tools to keep your information safe already exist, but people simply refuse to use them. Encrypt your data and it will be safe (assuming you use a decent passphrase or key).
Ummm, who cares if SHE has... nevermind.
I would like to say that, as a teacher, I have not seen this. Unfortunately this is not so. I don't think it is a union thing, but it is still disturbing. Even at a college that TEACHES Linux (well, they teach Unix, but we use Linux, as they don't DARE say they teach Linux), I faced opposition. The powers that be treated the class as a joke. They all belittled it, saying that while it was nice that we teach Linux, it is pretty much worthless. They are a Windows shop through and through. Even as my students and I continued to teach the power of the Linux OS, we were continually fought against. I, and my students, were told that what we were doing can't possibly be free, and that it can not possibly have real world implications. We would counter by telling them that the majority of web servers run Linux, and that Linux runs embedded on many of the devices they use every day, like TiVo, and routers. Still they claim we can not possibly be correct. Even when the president of the school made me project lead on the computer scholarship project, getting out free PC's to students in need (running Ubuntu), we found much resistance. Teacher's were afraid that they would not be able to read reports written on the computers, or that the students would get in trouble for running free software. The level of ignorance among the educators in this country in regards to Linux is amazing. I imagine that is just the way MacroSoft likes it. Meanwhile some of the best students are quietly running Linux, and are doing some amazing things. I think Linux should be taught to ALL IT majors. Every semester I would get students sent to my class because their business has a Linux box quietly running in the back room. The man who set it up no longer working there, and the company doesn't know what to do with it, and are scared to shut it down because they don't know if it is vital or not! Eventually that school shut me out of my Linux classes (they had gotten very popular) and has them now being taught by someone who is not familiar with it, just they way they like it, non-threatening.
Ugh, I should learn to proof read when I type in the morning. 2007-early 2008 is what I meant, not 2006. I am good (if I do say so myself) but not so good that I can tell the results of an attack before it even happens!
I can't believe that they are just discussing this NOW? I was discussing this back in '06 after the first round of attacks in my Master's IA course. The damage done in that case was tremendous. Estonia basically dropped off the face of the earth for a week. Transportation stopped, Banks stopped, Phones stopped, Web traffic stopped. The damage was tremendous. I started thinking about BotNet as a military weapon, and the thought chilled me. After all, what does an invading force do first when attacking an opponent? You take out command and control, communications. Normally this is done with bombs. Now, with a botnet, it can be done without firing a singe shot. Imagine what would happen in this country if the rail stopped moving, the phones and internet went down, and the banks closed overnight. Imagine that even news agencies came to a standstill. Imagine the panic that would ensue! Now imagine that same problem also in the military. Chaos! I am very saddened that they are just beginning to work on this now. It has been apparent to me for a long time that BotNets are a very capable poor man's WMD. The problem about issuing warrants against a BotNet though, is that most people participating are innocent. You would need to trace it back to the owner, and that can be very hard if they are any good. I mean, who is going to coordinate all this from their own system? I heard online that the DoD is working on being able to make a physical retaliatory strike against an online threat, but you better make damn sure that you are attacking the bad guy and not some dupe whose computer they have taken over!
While I would not put it as "weak" individuals having a reaction to the vaccine, your overall point is valid. It may be true that some people have had negative reactions to the vaccines. Much of the hype is overblown. People are blaming everything from asthma to autism on vaccines, even though there is little evidence to support this. Even if it were true, the vaccines are saving FAR more lives than they harm, and by a huge margin. Do we want to return to a world where devastating illnesses kill millions when that could have been avoided? The same people who want to stop the vaccinations would be screaming at the medical community to stop these illnesses! Meanwhile those that are refusing the vaccinations for their children are putting us ALL at risk. If these infections get a foothold, then even those who have been vaccinated are at risk. How foolish. It may be that we should be putting more research into the possible adverse effects of these vaccinations. Maybe we need to devote more effort into safer vaccinations, but the answer is NOT to start refusing vaccinations for our children, and put them, and everyone else, at risk due to some overblown sense of paranoia. The rise of asthma and other illnesses are more likely the result of poor diets filled with chemicals, and poor air quality because we keep trashing the environment, not vaccinations that are helping to save far more lives than they harm.
Yeah, I am tired, and the ideas kind of formed while I was typing. You know, I thought one thing and while I was typing was able to answer my own question, but other ones arose at the same time. I know a bit about what I am talking about, but I sure as heck am not a lawyer. I am very curious though, to know just what laws a good lawyer could claim are being violated.
Well, to tell you the truth, I have always had a problem with this argument. Basically you are saying that there are much bigger problems and crimes out there, so don't worry about the small problems/crimes. Should we not care about the mom and pop grocery store that was robbed last week because the bank was also robbed? Should we not bother about the child who was molested because there are so many unsolved murders? Where do you draw the line? If it is illegal then it is illegal. The severity of the crime comes out in the punishment (well, in an ideal world anyways). If you truly think that it is a meaningless crime, then work on decriminalizing it, but to argue that a small problem is not a problem at all because there are larger problems to worry about is silly.
Interesting. I don't think it would be copyright infringement exactly. They did develop a tool that essentially helps you steal things, though, I am not so sure if that is illegal either. I know if I had a store and I sold items, and someone wrote all over my advertisements where people could get the same stuff cheaper (or free) I would be very upset, and I imagine I would have some form of recourse, though I am not sure that recourse would be in the area of copyright infringement. If it is, then any add-on or program that alters the display of a web page could be guilty of the same copyright infringement! I am no legal expert, but I would love a lawyer's perspective on what law is violated here. I am pretty sure that there is one.
Already ignored. Google would be foolish to abandon Android. And as far as working on what he calls relying on "green" hardware, I thought that Android was also tied to the Open Source phone project. Indeed, if this is true, hardware compatibility isn't really an issue, is it?
The G1 indeed looking like a good first Android phone, though I must admit that the advertising for it is very poor. It leaves the user with little understanding of just what the platform is capable of, other than it can do google searches. They really need to ramp it up and get creative. And soon we will see the next generation of Android phones, which I am VERY excited about. Motorola is coming out with an Android phone next year that is supposed to be G1 like, with more hardware features, for less money. Also Asus is planning on releasing an Android phone in Q1 next year, but who knows how long it will take to get to the U.S.
You can watch the whole series on Joost, I believe. At least you could last year.
I ran a similar project. I worked as an adjunct professor at a community college, and I also was the project lead for the computer scholarship program. We had 100 donated computers for a local business. We made sure the hard drives were wiped, installed Ubuntu, and then set up the computer so that they could work well with our existing systems. This mostly involved setting the defaults for things like OpenOffice to save documents in formats that were easily read by other Windows systems the school uses. The computers went to students whose families did not have a computer. Check with local companies. Many often get rid of their old computers. Download a live CD like DBaN to make sure there is no old information left on the computers, and you can then assure companies that you will be securely deleting any information on those systems. One of my students also used to go once a month to the local recycling center and would pick up computers other people had discarded. Many people throw out perfectly good equipment, or they will have a Power supply go out, and figure the whole computer is trash, so they toss it. Grab the stuff, and it is usually easy to repair for minimal cost. You can also get help in these projects. Check with local schools and computer repair shops. Often you will find techs that are more than willing to donate some time for a project like this. They learn and also get to do something worthwhile!
As with most stories of this kind, it is skewed. Obama got more raw favorable news coverage, but take a look at WHAT was covered, and more importantly, what was not. A lot of stories were covered because the McCain campaign brought them up. A lot of things that that campaign said needed covering, and fact checking. They said a LOT of negative things that failed the truth check, and the news spent time straightening out the stories. The fact is, the McCain campaign focused most of its effort on Obama, not on themselves, and the Obama campaign did the opposite. The end result is that there is more coverage of Obama. Now look at what wasn't covered. Many of McCain's skeletons remained in the closet. Very little coverage of his role in the Keating 5. Very little coverage of his memberships in groups related to the Iran-Contra affair. Yet they DID cover every attempt to slime Obama from the McCain camp. The press, by and large, did attempt to cover the McCain campaign, and for quite a while did the campaigns bidding (until the campaign lashed out at the press). Unfortunately the McCain campaign tried to make this election about Obama, and did it badly, giving Obama a lot more press. That is McCain's fault, not the press. Besides, what do you expect when you attack the press? You expect them to get all warm and fuzzy over you?
I agree that the school is perhaps reacting too harshly. That very much depends on the totality of the situation, which I do not have. I only know part of the story. The ethical argument is also moot since the totality of the situation is also unknown. It certainly seems that the school is perhaps overreacting.
I was under the impression that the area was "somewhat" protected. Even if it wasn't, it is still against the law. While I agree that they should take it easy on the kid, especially if there was absolutely no protection in place, it is still well within their rights to prosecute, just as it is your right to do so if someone wanders onto your property and starts taking a look at the contents of your shed, which you forgot to lock.
Have you ever entered a bank when you weren't supposed to? Have you broken in after hours "just to look around?" Did you then leave a note telling them how bad their security was? Would you expect to NOT be prosecuted if you did? Your analogy is weak. Entering a bank during hours when you are invited to do so is different than entering after hours. Actually, a better analogy would be you entering the bank during working hours and walking in back and entering the vault "just for a look" without permission. I think they would prosecute you.
The law is quite clear. He accessed computers and information that he had no right to. HAcking into systems is not legal even if you "do no harm." How can you, or I, or anyone else prove there was no harm done? Sensitive information was accessed by this individual. That is harm in and of itself! Would you fail to prosecute someone if they had broken into your home, looked around for God knows how long, watched you sleep for a while, then left you a note telling you that your lock isn't very good? Accessing systems without permission is illegal. The kid should probably not be punished as severely as someone who tried to hide his access attempt, but he DID break the law.
I have reported many times about machines stealing elections, and being pre-programmed to do so. I have also seen the voter blamed for the latest inaccuracies. WHen they vote Obama, and it says you voted McCain, the election officials are blaming the voters saying they did not use the machine properly! Tell me, when a machine can not be used easily and reliably to record your vote, whose fault is it? One thing is for sure, it isn't the voter's fault! Design the thing to work easily and record a proper vote and you won't have these issues! This is either stealing, or bad and lazy programming. Either way it is criminal, since designing a voting machine that is reliable and foolproof isn't that hard (I have designs that would work). Probably lazy programmers, and bad QA.
Business reason that they can't sell it in the US:TRANSLATION: They can't make it conform to the emissions standards now in effect in many states. 65 MPG. Sounds impressive eh? Oh wait, it is a diesel. ONLY 65 MPG. They should be able to get more than that out of a diesel car by now.
Ya, this is not new, nor should it be Earth Shattering news. What would be news is if spy networks didn't use the internet for data collection. It works both ways though. There is a lot of information out there that isn't accurate or is purposely misleading. You may find information on the net, but verifying those leads can be the real bear I would imagine.
And that is your right. It is also their right to demand the testing. I think this has arisen because of the nature of the job, and the nature of the quality of professionals available. There are a lot of people out there that have been doing their IT jobs for years in various places, and they even have certifications (I mean, how hard is it to study for a cert test?). This does not mean they know what the heck they are doing. A lot of times these people even get stellar reviews from their former companies because those that they report to have no clue either. There are a heck of a lot of people in this profession that have been doing it wrong for a very, very long time. Kind of like management. There are a lot of managers out there who have been doing their jobs for a long time. They have just been doing it very, very badly. Unfortunately they are still getting hired, and doing poor jobs. That said, I am not sure I would subject myself to this either. If you want to evaluate my performance, that is what the probationary period is all about. I doubt there is much in a manufactured interview test that could tell them much about the true nature of their work, but it does tell you something about the employer, doesn't it?
Here is the problem that the companies don't seem to get. Security is a balancing act. When you ratchet up security too much, user friendliness goes down. That has two effects. The first is that people do not use the product. The second is that it drastically increases the number of people that bypass the security. This is the case here. The game is reportedly quite good. However the draconian approach to DRM means that fewer people will actually buy it, and more people, including a lot of people who wouldn't otherwise, bypass the security by downloading illegal copies. The DRM technique in this case is somewhat self-defeating. Now some might say that the company does not care, that they just want to ensure that they make money. However this doesn't ring true, as they would have made more money without the DRM. Many people who would normally buy the program are illegally downloading it because they do not like the DRM. The DRM development also cost money. So, in this case, the DRM may actually be a money loser.