Not using something that is famously known to be broken is a bad idea? Uh, sure.
I don't know who Tony Bradley is (and I'm not really interested), but TFA explains who George Kurtz is, and my thinking is that McAfee's entire business model is based on the fact that MS products are insecure and broad targets. Every time a PC gets Windows replaced, he loses a potential customer. Every time Windows gets malware, his existence is justified.
IE has several critical flaws, some of which have been unpatched for years. Recommending to use a known unsafe browser is little different than arguing cars don't need seat belts, or OSHA is a waste, or whatever else flies in the face of safety in a given context.
On September 10, 2001, Donald Rumsfeld was giving a press conference about how $2B was missing from the Pentagon.
On September 10, 2001, the WTC security contract with Securacom ended. Marvin Bush, W's brother, was a principle in the company, and also sat on the Board of directors of KuwAm, an Kuwaiti-American investment firm which financially backed Securacom.
I thought of this also when I was reading TFA. The Internet tears down all garden walls, AOL is only the most obvious example.
The Internet tore down the walled garden of every BBS that ever existed, and the operators were glad of it for the most part.
It's tearing down the MAFIAA's walled garden of distribution. Movie studios dislike NetFlix and they hate Red Box. The music cartel really doesn't like iTunes, but they tolerate it because they get a cut. And they all despise The Pirate Bay, et al.
The Internet is tearing down Microsoft's walled garden of software (which is what they mean when they say "ecosystem"). Don't like Windows? Go download any of a handful of BSD's or several dozen Linux distros. And you get the opportunity to make better whichever you choose.
(Which is why I laugh every time I see a Win7 commercial... MS is actually touting the fact that Win7 wasn't their idea. Now, about that monolithic kernel...)
Agreed, PETA doesn't deserve to have their existence justified by globbing a quote from one of their spokes-loons onto every article related to animals and/or food production. They should STFU, the thousands of dogs/cats/etc they "rescue" don't euthanize themselves.
Perhaps this is not as justified as the chief wants it to be. He and his subordinates are public servants, and should be held accountable. If the police are creating reason(s) for the public to distrust them, why should the public trust them?
What the chief is really saying: "I am a douchebag who thinks my position automatically entitles me to trust and respect."
Would the Cold War have fizzled in the way that it really did, with Saudi Arabia flooding the oil market in 1984 and causing the oil dependent Soviet economy to collapse?
This was not as arbitrary as one might think. Toward the end of NS4's actual development cycle, there was an attempt to wring another major version out of that codebase, and it was called Mozilla 5. Eventually it was abandoned because the new NGLayout engine (now known as Gecko) was much better than the clunky old Mosaic-derived codebase. The NG stuff became the basis for Netscape versions 6 through 8, the Mozilla Suite, Firefox, Thunderbird, and lots of other things.
I know there are some Netscape/Mozilla folks around here who could correct/expand that story.
The reality is, only the kind of people who read this site actually give a damn, and I bet for at least some, it's an academic concern.
Hosting companies don't care.
Server management software vendors (CPanel, etc) don't care.
Other vendors whose software relies on FTP (Dreamweaver, etc) don't care.
Why don't they care? Because retraining users and staff is something on which they can all put a reasonably certain dollar amount, which is almost certainly higher than maintaining the status quo of tedious disclaimers and putting out fires when they erupt.
The average user doesn't care, because they assume that a product or service is reasonably secure, and many of them can't be bothered with any technical details.
I agree, and have for years, that FTP should be unmercifully killed, certainly on public networks. I'm no security zealot, but this is pretty basic stuff.
There were some rumors shortly after Pickens announced this wind farm scheme that it was really a cover for a water rights land grab. What else could this mean?
Slashdot Mirror
He thinks everything exists for the sole purpose of carrying a price tag.
Well, what blackhat could pass up easy access to anything in C:\WINNT\system32, or the paging file, or any other critical file, from the web?
Not using something that is famously known to be broken is a bad idea? Uh, sure.
I don't know who Tony Bradley is (and I'm not really interested), but TFA explains who George Kurtz is, and my thinking is that McAfee's entire business model is based on the fact that MS products are insecure and broad targets. Every time a PC gets Windows replaced, he loses a potential customer. Every time Windows gets malware, his existence is justified.
IE has several critical flaws, some of which have been unpatched for years. Recommending to use a known unsafe browser is little different than arguing cars don't need seat belts, or OSHA is a waste, or whatever else flies in the face of safety in a given context.
That guy doesn't represent what bin Laden would look like now. You can tell because:
On September 10, 2001, Donald Rumsfeld was giving a press conference about how $2B was missing from the Pentagon.
On September 10, 2001, the WTC security contract with Securacom ended. Marvin Bush, W's brother, was a principle in the company, and also sat on the Board of directors of KuwAm, an Kuwaiti-American investment firm which financially backed Securacom.
This epic comment raises a couple of questions. Who would win these fights?
AT&T's choices:
Did they choose wisely? I think not.
I thought of this also when I was reading TFA. The Internet tears down all garden walls, AOL is only the most obvious example.
The Internet tore down the walled garden of every BBS that ever existed, and the operators were glad of it for the most part.
It's tearing down the MAFIAA's walled garden of distribution. Movie studios dislike NetFlix and they hate Red Box. The music cartel really doesn't like iTunes, but they tolerate it because they get a cut. And they all despise The Pirate Bay, et al.
The Internet is tearing down Microsoft's walled garden of software (which is what they mean when they say "ecosystem"). Don't like Windows? Go download any of a handful of BSD's or several dozen Linux distros. And you get the opportunity to make better whichever you choose.
(Which is why I laugh every time I see a Win7 commercial... MS is actually touting the fact that Win7 wasn't their idea. Now, about that monolithic kernel...)
No, they'd call it L#.
Agreed, PETA doesn't deserve to have their existence justified by globbing a quote from one of their spokes-loons onto every article related to animals and/or food production. They should STFU, the thousands of dogs/cats/etc they "rescue" don't euthanize themselves.
Remove Flash's ability for cross-domain cookies. Browser plugins should use the browser's cookie storage, IMO.
What about Windows' marketing since 2000 hasn't been at least vaguely aimed at the OMGPONIEZ!!1!1one demo?
Not yet.
The creationists will blindly and steadfastly cling to their mysticism-based pseudoscience until two chimps mate and produce a homo sapiens offspring.
Which of course is not how evolution works.
Perhaps this is not as justified as the chief wants it to be. He and his subordinates are public servants, and should be held accountable. If the police are creating reason(s) for the public to distrust them, why should the public trust them?
What the chief is really saying: "I am a douchebag who thinks my position automatically entitles me to trust and respect."
Since you brought it up, my home network machines are named after regions of Middle-Earth. Mordor, Numenor, Rohan, Gondor, Shire, etc.
Every tile in every possible size of Minesweeper field has it's own dedicated icon dll.
Don't forget they spent all that money protecting the Shack part of the name, when they sued AutoShack into changing their name to AutoZone.
...or so I heard. It was supposedly removed a couple weeks before release for reasons unkown to me.
is all right here (j/k). Can I get that at the Microsoft store?
Would the Cold War have fizzled in the way that it really did, with Saudi Arabia flooding the oil market in 1984 and causing the oil dependent Soviet economy to collapse?
Only hard core Star Wars nerds would attempt to cross swords.
This was not as arbitrary as one might think. Toward the end of NS4's actual development cycle, there was an attempt to wring another major version out of that codebase, and it was called Mozilla 5. Eventually it was abandoned because the new NGLayout engine (now known as Gecko) was much better than the clunky old Mosaic-derived codebase. The NG stuff became the basis for Netscape versions 6 through 8, the Mozilla Suite, Firefox, Thunderbird, and lots of other things.
I know there are some Netscape/Mozilla folks around here who could correct/expand that story.
Mutually assured distraction?
The reality is, only the kind of people who read this site actually give a damn, and I bet for at least some, it's an academic concern.
Hosting companies don't care.
Server management software vendors (CPanel, etc) don't care.
Other vendors whose software relies on FTP (Dreamweaver, etc) don't care.
Why don't they care? Because retraining users and staff is something on which they can all put a reasonably certain dollar amount, which is almost certainly higher than maintaining the status quo of tedious disclaimers and putting out fires when they erupt.
The average user doesn't care, because they assume that a product or service is reasonably secure, and many of them can't be bothered with any technical details.
I agree, and have for years, that FTP should be unmercifully killed, certainly on public networks. I'm no security zealot, but this is pretty basic stuff.
There were some rumors shortly after Pickens announced this wind farm scheme that it was really a cover for a water rights land grab. What else could this mean?