I understand you're logic, but why give money to someone supporting you already? Unless it's a "Job Well Done" type of payment, which doesn't look so good either.
I'm afraid if someone has a problem with the company that gave the contribution, that will reflect on receiver. And maybe that's fine, especially in some "clear cut" cases (personally things like Big Tobacco) but it gets into a more gray area, imo, with things like the TelCo's because not everyone is against it, or unlike Big Tobacco, science hasn't proved something about it.
Off-topic: It's hilarious that standing up and saying you can arbitrarily like or not like something, without a clear rational (socks?) for doing so results in an insightful rating. Not that you're not allowed, and not that we all don't do it from time to time, but admitting to it is either very brave or very foolish. I'm not exactly sure which one?
I disagree. "social stability on your home world" could be friendly, or it could be wiping out any diversity, be it thought, race, or religion. It's so ridiculous to actually think about this, it is actually bringing a smile to my face.
You're right, I mean thank god Microsoft is making their own hardware now, too. Oh wait. Apple having bad marketing? Are you kidding me? Everyone and their mother wants an iphone, and that's something that Microsoft did first with smart phones, although not as refined/cool.
What you day, I feel, is very true. And I'm not going to debate any of the points you've made, except for the last question. The answer to that, in my opinion, is that it depends.
An aspect that we need to take into account in all of this, is that larger companies have the ability to fail, whereas smaller, startups can't take that chance (or if they do and fail, we never hear from them again). Of course no one sets out to fail, and places like Microsoft might seemingly punish the failures, but having enough capital to attempt new ideas or offer a competing product is a great reason why a lot of resources controlled by a company is not a bad thing.
Now, don't get me wrong, these new ideas can and do come from startups. But can you imagine a startup company trying to make a video game console? Certain things can be done by the little guy, but others are very difficult if not impossible (and I rarely say that) to do. Do I hate open-source? Of course not. But I'm just suggesting an area where having the money spread out might not be the best scenario.
I think you actually missed the worst part about this summary (not the article...)
From the summary: "Such as Windows Update... can detract from overall security, and should be redesigned."
The ellipse represents 14 pages of information in this sentence. And the Actual PDF doesn't say it detracts from security, but rather that the scheme is insecure. Which is quite a difference. Normally I don't do this, but the quote is really stupid when put the way the contributor or editor put in there. The article was interesting enough on its own accord (automatic patch-exploit generation) without having to throw your own personal cracks in there.
I'm not sure I agree with this. Wouldn't it just be easier to send out mass emails to the target company, and just wait for the one stupid individual to click the link? Then you've got your malware or whathaveyou, and you're on your way. I can see your point if we're talking about some ridiculously secure intranet that you want access to, but not something targeting seemingly random CEO's. But I do not have a lot of experience in this area, so maybe you know more than I'm getting from the post.
If your workplace allows this to happen, you have so many more problems then "millenials." Seriously, stop complaining that this happened, and start complaining that it was allowed to happen. Besides, why would this "kid" tell anyone about it when setting up an open access point implicitly announces it has happened? I mean, it doesn't take a crack detective to find an open network...
I'd also like you to qualify your statements. "Half of these kids?" Really? What's your sample size? Because I want to know why you're calling out my generation. I swear if someone rails against apple or Linux, a shit storm follows here, yet the same baseless, asinine arguments are used against "kids" or young people in the work place and it's treated as a right of passage. Using your mentality, I can say, without cracking a smile, that you're part of the generation that let Y2K happen, and I shouldn't trust a damn thing you give me. Does that argument make any sense? No? Welcome to your post.
The Waterfall method has it's uses, and certainly hasn't been "discredited." If what you were going for was the advent of agile techniques make certain things faster/more effective, than I wholeheartedly agree. But just a point of reference, I'm pretty sure i missed out on a job opportunity because the interviewer kept saying that "everything should be done using Agile methods," and I disagreed. He kept pushing, and I saw he wasn't a big fan of me. I then asked him how many iterations it would take to design a building or an airplane, before he got it right? How would you test that?
Certain things do not have changing requirements, which is the key use for agile methods. If you know exactly what your system needs to do (I know, rare)- than a strict adherence to some Agile methods could prolong the project.
That said, gmail is perfectly suited for agile methods, hence the perpetual beta.
Where do you live, sounds like the cops there do what they do very well.
The absence of punishment does not imply the absence of justice. I have not been cited for any felonies, does that mean I'm just good at getting away with them?
Not to mention if all of the firetrucks are somewhere, you can turn on the news and find it. Besides, terrorist plans are generally not "spur of the moment."
Although the idea of tracking and finding a pattern to police vehicle movement is both scary and interesting.
It's not even really worth posting, but a lot of advertising isn't to get you to buy an unneeded option or spend money you wouldn't have, but get you to choose one product over another. Brand familiarity goes a long way when you have to buy something that you've never bought before.
A good example is something like a carpet cleaner. I never had to worry about such things before I got my own apartment/house. But when I inevitably spilled something I went to Target and bought one of them. I bought Resolve because I knew about it from TV or something stupid*, and it worked on the stain. So we all win, right?
It might also have been on sale, as that's generally how I buy something:-)
What if the advertising is mis-representing the product. Extending your analogy (and to make it more correct), You're calling it free samples, the samples are actually for business partners who are users of some service, but they don't check your id (tying in that gym membership!). Now, because you advertised free samples, you're the one who is morally wrong (I don't really care about criminally wrong), the people who read "free samples" and went and got it, probably didn't know.
People who randomly followed the link probably don't know, but many people will eventually figure out what's going on, and that's the issue here. People knew it was to be a pay service, but took it anyways. Are they criminal? I don't know, morally bankrupt on THIS issue? I would say yes.
There is a problem in our society, when people do things that are not criminal, but are still wrong. The debates that we have here are evidence enough of that, and many have touched on it. I "understand" that it's a large corporation that isn't 'losing money' per se, but there are opportunity costs. The same thing happens to band members with an album, artists with a work of art, and chef's with a new recipe. When do you draw the line and say "I won't, even if I can"?
Familiarity is worth $200 to a lot of people. Besides, if this becomes the case, I'd have to imagine we won't be seeing vista or whatever windows system there is being sold for the same price.
Or from the airport/shipyard to several distribution centers. I don't think this will be coming to my home any time soon, but it would definitely be useful for constant, large freight trips. Much like mail via air being sent to the local post office, before routed to your mailbox.
Slashdot Mirror
I write directions to my house like switch statements
...
foreach (@directions)
{
switch($_)
{
case "I-5" {print "go North";}
case "Del Mar" {print "Turn left";}
else {print "Oh shit, call me";}
}
}
Very few people actually make it, which is fine as I don't have many friends anymore.
I understand you're logic, but why give money to someone supporting you already? Unless it's a "Job Well Done" type of payment, which doesn't look so good either.
I'm afraid if someone has a problem with the company that gave the contribution, that will reflect on receiver. And maybe that's fine, especially in some "clear cut" cases (personally things like Big Tobacco) but it gets into a more gray area, imo, with things like the TelCo's because not everyone is against it, or unlike Big Tobacco, science hasn't proved something about it.
Off-topic: It's hilarious that standing up and saying you can arbitrarily like or not like something, without a clear rational (socks?) for doing so results in an insightful rating. Not that you're not allowed, and not that we all don't do it from time to time, but admitting to it is either very brave or very foolish. I'm not exactly sure which one?
Sorry ellipses = oval guys, the correct answer is:
That's gold Jerry! Gold!
Saying it doesn't fit at all is just as valid as saying it fits perfectly.
No, only a space grammar Nazi will do.
So that's how George won a second term- Democrats were just setting it up for the '08 election! BEHOLD!
I disagree. "social stability on your home world" could be friendly, or it could be wiping out any diversity, be it thought, race, or religion. It's so ridiculous to actually think about this, it is actually bringing a smile to my face.
You're right, I mean thank god Microsoft is making their own hardware now, too. Oh wait. Apple having bad marketing? Are you kidding me? Everyone and their mother wants an iphone, and that's something that Microsoft did first with smart phones, although not as refined/cool.
Yeah, but he probably won't be fired for being taken hostage and beaten. He might be fired for taking the unencrypted, company database and losing it.
What you day, I feel, is very true. And I'm not going to debate any of the points you've made, except for the last question. The answer to that, in my opinion, is that it depends.
An aspect that we need to take into account in all of this, is that larger companies have the ability to fail, whereas smaller, startups can't take that chance (or if they do and fail, we never hear from them again). Of course no one sets out to fail, and places like Microsoft might seemingly punish the failures, but having enough capital to attempt new ideas or offer a competing product is a great reason why a lot of resources controlled by a company is not a bad thing.
Now, don't get me wrong, these new ideas can and do come from startups. But can you imagine a startup company trying to make a video game console? Certain things can be done by the little guy, but others are very difficult if not impossible (and I rarely say that) to do. Do I hate open-source? Of course not. But I'm just suggesting an area where having the money spread out might not be the best scenario.
I think you actually missed the worst part about this summary (not the article...)
From the summary: "Such as Windows Update... can detract from overall security, and should be redesigned."
The ellipse represents 14 pages of information in this sentence. And the Actual PDF doesn't say it detracts from security, but rather that the scheme is insecure. Which is quite a difference. Normally I don't do this, but the quote is really stupid when put the way the contributor or editor put in there. The article was interesting enough on its own accord (automatic patch-exploit generation) without having to throw your own personal cracks in there.
Let's grow up, people.
I'm not sure I agree with this. Wouldn't it just be easier to send out mass emails to the target company, and just wait for the one stupid individual to click the link? Then you've got your malware or whathaveyou, and you're on your way. I can see your point if we're talking about some ridiculously secure intranet that you want access to, but not something targeting seemingly random CEO's. But I do not have a lot of experience in this area, so maybe you know more than I'm getting from the post.
AFC is already a used term in certain circles: Average Frustrated Chump. Not that it doesn't apply here, because AC's are almost always AFC's :-)
If your workplace allows this to happen, you have so many more problems then "millenials." Seriously, stop complaining that this happened, and start complaining that it was allowed to happen. Besides, why would this "kid" tell anyone about it when setting up an open access point implicitly announces it has happened? I mean, it doesn't take a crack detective to find an open network...
I'd also like you to qualify your statements. "Half of these kids?" Really? What's your sample size? Because I want to know why you're calling out my generation. I swear if someone rails against apple or Linux, a shit storm follows here, yet the same baseless, asinine arguments are used against "kids" or young people in the work place and it's treated as a right of passage. Using your mentality, I can say, without cracking a smile, that you're part of the generation that let Y2K happen, and I shouldn't trust a damn thing you give me. Does that argument make any sense? No? Welcome to your post.
Do you know what the word everything means? I mean, I'm pretty sure airplanes, buildings, and software are under that umbrella.
The Waterfall method has it's uses, and certainly hasn't been "discredited." If what you were going for was the advent of agile techniques make certain things faster/more effective, than I wholeheartedly agree. But just a point of reference, I'm pretty sure i missed out on a job opportunity because the interviewer kept saying that "everything should be done using Agile methods," and I disagreed. He kept pushing, and I saw he wasn't a big fan of me. I then asked him how many iterations it would take to design a building or an airplane, before he got it right? How would you test that?
Certain things do not have changing requirements, which is the key use for agile methods. If you know exactly what your system needs to do (I know, rare)- than a strict adherence to some Agile methods could prolong the project.
That said, gmail is perfectly suited for agile methods, hence the perpetual beta.
Where do you live, sounds like the cops there do what they do very well.
The absence of punishment does not imply the absence of justice. I have not been cited for any felonies, does that mean I'm just good at getting away with them?
Not to mention if all of the firetrucks are somewhere, you can turn on the news and find it. Besides, terrorist plans are generally not "spur of the moment."
Although the idea of tracking and finding a pattern to police vehicle movement is both scary and interesting.
To be fair, shouldn't Google be able to find that data? I mean, it is a search engine...
It's not even really worth posting, but a lot of advertising isn't to get you to buy an unneeded option or spend money you wouldn't have, but get you to choose one product over another. Brand familiarity goes a long way when you have to buy something that you've never bought before.
:-)
A good example is something like a carpet cleaner. I never had to worry about such things before I got my own apartment/house. But when I inevitably spilled something I went to Target and bought one of them. I bought Resolve because I knew about it from TV or something stupid*, and it worked on the stain. So we all win, right?
It might also have been on sale, as that's generally how I buy something
What if the advertising is mis-representing the product. Extending your analogy (and to make it more correct), You're calling it free samples, the samples are actually for business partners who are users of some service, but they don't check your id (tying in that gym membership!). Now, because you advertised free samples, you're the one who is morally wrong (I don't really care about criminally wrong), the people who read "free samples" and went and got it, probably didn't know.
People who randomly followed the link probably don't know, but many people will eventually figure out what's going on, and that's the issue here. People knew it was to be a pay service, but took it anyways. Are they criminal? I don't know, morally bankrupt on THIS issue? I would say yes.
There is a problem in our society, when people do things that are not criminal, but are still wrong. The debates that we have here are evidence enough of that, and many have touched on it. I "understand" that it's a large corporation that isn't 'losing money' per se, but there are opportunity costs. The same thing happens to band members with an album, artists with a work of art, and chef's with a new recipe. When do you draw the line and say "I won't, even if I can"?
Familiarity is worth $200 to a lot of people. Besides, if this becomes the case, I'd have to imagine we won't be seeing vista or whatever windows system there is being sold for the same price.
Or from the airport/shipyard to several distribution centers. I don't think this will be coming to my home any time soon, but it would definitely be useful for constant, large freight trips. Much like mail via air being sent to the local post office, before routed to your mailbox.
Really? Utter shit?
Mind if I drink your milkshake then?