Firefall for the Sci-fi/Borderlands fans. Free 2 play, no pay to win. FPS style with dynamic(tornados) and static(player activated) world events. Only been out a couple weeks but looks pretty nice so far. It does need a bit more content in the midrange levels and there are still the occasional bugs but all in all one of the better MMOs I have seen recently. I am not bored yet even having done some missions upwards of a dozen times. In any case if you like FPS (you can even set it 3d person if you like), Sci-Fi and Borderlands (It has that feel not sure how else to explain it) then you should at least try it out. It is free after all.
While I understand some users concerns about theft of the print/data/etc my concern is more to do with legal issues that have been brought up about this. The fingerprint could be considered a key and used to circumvent 5th Amendment issues. Currently the government (US at least) cannot compel you to give them a password or combination to unlock something but they can compel you to give them blood/urine or any other forensic item. They can already fingerprint you at arrest so it is not a far leap to envision the courts deciding that compelling you to unlock your phone by fingerprint is permissible.
Example: They cannot compel you to revel the combination of a safe because that requires you to give them knowledge that only you know that could incriminate yourself. However, they *can* compel you to hand over the key to a lock as that is evidence and is not considered knowledge covered by the 5th. This technology removes the lock code which would be considered 5th Amendment territory and places the fingerprint into evidentiary collection. They could compel you to place your finger on the phone for the purpose of unlocking it same as they could compel you to provide the key to unlock a door/safe/etc. Now the 2 day PIN code would help, but seriously who has not unlocked their phone in 2 days?
Yes, I know they can currently confiscate your phone and break into it same as they could any other obstruction, but that is not the point. As phones get ever more sophisticated encryption this is opening a very large door for the government to walk through.
The first time you load each game, it will load slowly.
If you close and reload a game, it will load quickly.
If you close a game, load another game, then load the first game it will load slowly again.
Um, not necessarily. It doesn't need to load the entire 5Gb of the game in order to provide good caching response. If you played the entire game, then exited, played the entirety of another game and *then* came back to the first then, yes, it *might* load slowly again.
However, if you load a game, play a level (or even a few), exit play another game for a level and went back to the first it is highly probable that your previous session will still be cached, but loading the next level *might* be slow (depending on what textures and other data are needed to load). 8Gb is actually quite a lot of data as far as individual programs/games go, so 8 or even 16gb of cache goes a long way towards speeding load times as well as accessing textures on the fly.
That said, there are many games and applications that just routinely hammer the drive. Which is why on my system I have a SSD for certain games and a caching HDD for others. There is practically no noticeable difference playing games from different drives as long as you understand what each program/games needs are and store it appropriately. How do you determine this prior to installing? Good luck with that. I haven't been able to determine beforehand where to install so I move things around as needed when I notice too much latency. Personally, anything that is twitchy I put on the SSD just, well just because.:P
The UK handgun ban is largely irrelevant given how rare UK handgun ownership was to begin with. Even if it was then looking at how gun crime stats change immediately after a ban rather than over a longer period and in context of other events is pointless.
I went back 30 years prior to the ban (when the Home Office still had those records). The only drastic increase both prior and since was in 1997-2002. Their violent crime literally doubled in 5 years. Prior to '97 their crime increase was marginal to nonexistent, pretty much in line with population increase. There was no reason for the explosion of crime in that period. It was pretty much unprecedented.
They have since brought their crime back down to at or below 1997 levels (as a percentage of pop), but the gun ban did not work as intended. There were numerous MPs that were absolutely livid about the statistical numbers when they came out in 2002, but nothing ever came of it and any attempts to reverse the ban were defeated.
Yes, UK gun ownership was always low and gun murder (actually murder in general) low as well. The fact that it doubled immediately after the ban, while I cannot claim causation, cannot be dismissed lightly and putting the UK as a good example of gun control at work is disingenuous at best. To this day they are still dealing with massive numbers of illegal guns in the hands of criminals.
The Supreme Court rules what the Constitution means not you. A well-regulated militia has no bearing whatsoever on the right to keep and bear arms and that is exactly what they said In Heller. If that isn't disagreeing with you then I do not know what is. Your statement is not factual unless you are playing word games with the 2dA. The Constitution does not grant rights, period. It enumerates what rights the Government may not infringe upon. The Supreme Court stated that no militia membership is required to satisfy the right to keep and bear arms. Therefore, your statement that the Constitution grants this right to militias is in direct opposition to what the Court ruled. Also, the definition of "well-regulated" circa 1800 meant to be in working order or effective. Nowhere in the 2dA does it ever state that membership in such a body was required, only that in order to have such a body the people need arms and as such the government may never infringe upon this right.
I had a brief look at the stats - i live in the uk, where pistols are completely illegal to own, and shotgun and rifle possession is rare and heavily regulated. Policemen carry a truncheon!
Murder rates in the uk are 1.2(per 100k population per year)
Murder rates in the US are 4.7(ditto)
Simple?
You left out the fact that after 1997, when the UK implemented its handgun ban, murders with handguns doubled over the next 5 years (not that they were all that high to begin with). Violent crime doubled and violent crime with firearms (not including air-weapons) quadrupled. (Home Office Statistical Bulletin Jan 2002). The UK has *always* had low murder rates both prior to and after your ban, but it took close to 12 years after your ban was put in place to get your murder rates back down to where they started prior to 1997. That is not exactly a shining example of gun control done right. That is also not mentioning the fact that the UK press estimates 4-5 million illegal guns on the streets in the UK as well as the fact that they did a survey and 1 in 5 Brits know where to get a gun if they need one. Again, not the shining example of working gun control.
I hate getting into a gun control debate on this thread and replying to an AC to boot but.... what massive killings? Out of a nation of 300 million we have approx ~15k gun deaths annually. Granted, any death is tragic but I would hardly call it massive compared to other causes of death. The majority of these are criminal with accidental and suicides thrown in. Even if you make the case that all of the suicides would have been saved (good luck making that case), criminals will still be able to get weapons since they are...(wait for it) criminals.
The UK tried this in 97. In the 5 years after their gun ban violent crime doubled, violent crime with handguns (not including air weapons) quadrupled and handgun murders doubled (Home Office Statistical Bulletin Jan 2003). It took them another 7 years to get their crime back down to where it started in the first place. All this for a nation that had an annual gun homicide rate of 50 in 1997. As it is, today they estimate there are in excess of 5 million illegal guns on the streets of the UK (as reported by the UK press) and that 1 in 5 Brits know how to get a gun if they need one. This is gun control working? Also keep in mind the UK is an island, has 1/10 the population of the US and even they cannot control guns effectively. Exactly how are we to do it when we can't even keep illegal drugs out (and that is a whole different can of worms).
Guns are not the problem. We have a violent society and we are no longer properly identifying and caring for our mentally ill citizens. We need to fix the cause not the result.
My High School was lucky enough to have one gifted to it. Apparently, Hugh Hefner (Yes, *that* Hugh Hefner) was an alumnus of my High School and had his daughter come to the school to present the check. I remember learning Assembly, Fortran, Watfiv, PL\1 and I think Cobol as well as rudimentary LED and circuit logic either on it or the IBM 360 downtown. Yes, once upon a time the Chicago public school system had a very good education system. I even remember breaking into the 360 and messing with other school's (and students) teachers assignments (teacher's password: pencil....really?! and taped to the desk next to their terminal./facepalm).
Not only silly FUCKING annoying. The dogs tail sets of the Kinect all the time and worse when I was playing Skyrim **FUCKING DIALOGUE** activated commands in the game.
All I want from Kinect is a Gesis style visualizer for music with interaction.
Saw this little idea on another site (wish I could take credit for it, but meh). Sony creates new ad campaign. Ad starts out with "XBox, Off!"
That is called deduplication and most modern SAN systems have this feature. You can have both thin-provisioning and deduplication for increased savings. In Mr. Dotcoms business model I doubt he will get many exact duplicate files, but that really doesn't matter because you can still deduplicate similar binary strings within differing binary files or as you said duplicate blocks. In any case dedupe and thin-prov are not mutually exclusive, you can do both.
Normally dedupe is more efficient for backups or when used on the disk target for a virtual environment since you only need one copy of notepad.exe if you are hosting 200+ windows servers. The same applies to unchanging files in *nix systems.
The thing is you *have* to have some way to "present" the 50GB of promised space. While you may use dedupe or any other method to reduce your storage footprint the end user wants to see that storage. You either have to present that space raw, which comitts it from the SAN or as a thin-provisioned LUN with only the bare minimum of space actually reserved. How you store those files after the fact is up to you as the hosting company, but if you promise 50GB of space the user will want to see that space available.
This weird criminal somehow has 50 GB * 1,000,000 = 47.6 petabytes of enterprise storage? Without getting one dollar? How is this paid for? Not to mention all the data traffic back and forth which will be even more expensive?
Depending on the backend SAN he has, you can use thin-provisioning since there will not be a demand from all users for the entirety of their storage immediately. He can install 50 or so TB, provision that out then add the rest as needed, when needed. The user will see 50gb available but until they actually upload a certain percentage of that they don't actually have that amount of storage. Since the vast majority won't be uploading that in the near term he can do this until there is a demand for it.
Even adding in duplication for backups that only means 100TB. 100TB SAN is not that expensive actually. Since this is storage and not active access you can load it up with inexpensive 1TB SATA disks vs FC.
That's a really interesting point. In the minds of the Framers, the press was literally that - the printing press, an object. Certainly Thomas Paine (who published Common Senseanonymously) didn't have a journalism degree, nor ascribe to the other journalistic criteria the judge in this case is enumerating.
...and this has nothing to do with her right to publish. Only whether she can be sued for libel for *what* she published. Taking your example, Thomas Paine would be sued if he wrote and published libelous material. Nothing is *preventing* him from doing so, but nothing is protecting him from the repercussions for said writings.
Shield laws, as others have stated, are a modern device. They did not exist during Thomas Paine's time. If you published lies, you could be sued then as today. If she wants to qualify for Shield protection there are certain qualifications that we require from her. That she did not have *any* of them is of paramount importance here. She did not fact check, she did not get both sides of the story she did not even bother with the basic 5 Ws of Journalism.
If she had evidenced even *some* of the requirements the judge outlined, she might have been ok. That she had none makes her a hack on a personal vendetta whether her accusations are true or not. The judge was correct in this case and it does not weaken the 1st Amendment in any way. This particular blogger is not a journalist. I do not believe this decision does anything to any other blogger but give them a wakeup call. If you want to be treated like journalists, start acting like one. Granted our current media rarely, if ever, act like journalists either but that is a separate rant.
Nothing in this decision diminishes or even impacts Freedom of the Press. Anyone can print anything they like, but just like Freedom of Speech does not grant you the right to scream fire in a crowded thater Freedom of the Press does not automatically exempt you from the repercussions arising from your writings.
KeyPass is awesome. Let it generate a very long, strong password for every site or purpose you need and you need only remember one password. Save that password in a safe place and give that to your children. I put the db up on Dropbox so I can access my passwords anywhere I can get internet access (and yes I have a strong master password as well).
Only one caveat for the auto generated passwords. Make sure the site you are generating the password for actually accepts the length password you are generating. I had an issue where I generated a 20 char password for my online banking. It acted like it took the password but when I tried to use it the login process only accepted 16 char passwords (and no, cutting the last 4 or first 4 char off the password didn't work), just an fyi there.
It's obvious that NetFlix doesn't understand its customers anymore (if it ever did.) What I used to take as excellent customer focused strategy now seems to have been completely accidental. Every customer facing change they've made over the past few years has made the NetFlix experience progressively worse. At this point, I've had enough of their confused thrashing, and will still be cancelling my subscription. I checked my records, I joined NetFlix in 2004, and used to have a 3 DVD plan, but inf recent years have dropped to 1 DVD, then no DVDs, and now, no NetFlix.
Same here, the last announcement caused me to cancel that day and made me take another look at Blockbuster. After the price jump I had to drop down to 2 DVDs. With BB I'm back to 3 and get Blu-ray and games for no extra charge. Granted, Netflix has the most amazing search and recommendation system around, but I can't justify staying with them for that and frankly I don't trust them anymore. If that insane CEO leaves I *may* try them again, but as long as that idiot is leading things I am staying away.
I can't say I didn't fantasize about throwing a supermagnet into the data center of an ex-employer I was downsized from, but I knew better and the majority of adults I hope would know better too.
Yeah, I have had those fantasies too. You don't realize just how much damage you can do until you sit and think about it. After being let go by a retail chain with about 700 stores I realized that in about 15min I could pretty much put the entire chain out of business. They had just scrapped all their phones for VOIP and I had the passwords to all the routers and knew they had the domain admin password hardcoded into the mainframe (I had tried, unsuccessfully for over a year to get them to change that).
It would have been very easy to vpn in using the admin account, telnet to the furthest VOIP router and erase mem my way back to the office effectively wiping out their phone network. Then, set the tape robot to bulk erase (they didn't use offsite storage - too expensive), wipe the fileserver, domain controllers, AIX and Linux and logoff. They also refused to buy any intrusion detection software so very little chance of getting caught. I would never do that, but it gave me a little perverse pleasure knowing that I could.
That company is still in business and I know of at least two instances where they have had breaches due to their refusal to implement even the most basic of security precautions. Still, I should thank them for canning me. I now work for a Fortune 500 company making more than double what they were paying, so all's well that ends well I guess.
Having spent a little over 6 years in the Marines I never saw a single operation that combined Air Force with Marines. I was involved in numerous combined arms operations both state side and overseas and not once were Air Force personnel involved nor was there any Air Force material or equipment ever used in support of Marine operations, so pardon me if I call bull. They may pay lip service to those ideas, they might even have those goals written down, but in practice it does not happen.
In a protracted war, I am sure the lines will be blurred, but it has always been that the Air Force has more of a support obligation for the Army and not the Marines. We got our support from the Navy and from our own Air units. Also to note, the GP stated that the Air Forces ONLY responsibility is to support the Marines, which is completely off, no matter how you slice it.
Slashdot Mirror
Firefall for the Sci-fi/Borderlands fans. Free 2 play, no pay to win. FPS style with dynamic(tornados) and static(player activated) world events. Only been out a couple weeks but looks pretty nice so far. It does need a bit more content in the midrange levels and there are still the occasional bugs but all in all one of the better MMOs I have seen recently. I am not bored yet even having done some missions upwards of a dozen times. In any case if you like FPS (you can even set it 3d person if you like), Sci-Fi and Borderlands (It has that feel not sure how else to explain it) then you should at least try it out. It is free after all.
Here is an article that explains this better than I did, written by an attorney that specializes in computer security, electronic privacy etc.
http://www.wired.com/opinion/2013/09/the-unexpected-result-of-fingerprint-authentication-that-you-cant-take-the-fifth/
While I understand some users concerns about theft of the print/data/etc my concern is more to do with legal issues that have been brought up about this. The fingerprint could be considered a key and used to circumvent 5th Amendment issues. Currently the government (US at least) cannot compel you to give them a password or combination to unlock something but they can compel you to give them blood/urine or any other forensic item. They can already fingerprint you at arrest so it is not a far leap to envision the courts deciding that compelling you to unlock your phone by fingerprint is permissible.
Example: They cannot compel you to revel the combination of a safe because that requires you to give them knowledge that only you know that could incriminate yourself. However, they *can* compel you to hand over the key to a lock as that is evidence and is not considered knowledge covered by the 5th. This technology removes the lock code which would be considered 5th Amendment territory and places the fingerprint into evidentiary collection. They could compel you to place your finger on the phone for the purpose of unlocking it same as they could compel you to provide the key to unlock a door/safe/etc. Now the 2 day PIN code would help, but seriously who has not unlocked their phone in 2 days?
Yes, I know they can currently confiscate your phone and break into it same as they could any other obstruction, but that is not the point. As phones get ever more sophisticated encryption this is opening a very large door for the government to walk through.
The first time you load each game, it will load slowly.
If you close and reload a game, it will load quickly.
If you close a game, load another game, then load the first game it will load slowly again.
Um, not necessarily. It doesn't need to load the entire 5Gb of the game in order to provide good caching response. If you played the entire game, then exited, played the entirety of another game and *then* came back to the first then, yes, it *might* load slowly again.
:P
However, if you load a game, play a level (or even a few), exit play another game for a level and went back to the first it is highly probable that your previous session will still be cached, but loading the next level *might* be slow (depending on what textures and other data are needed to load). 8Gb is actually quite a lot of data as far as individual programs/games go, so 8 or even 16gb of cache goes a long way towards speeding load times as well as accessing textures on the fly.
That said, there are many games and applications that just routinely hammer the drive. Which is why on my system I have a SSD for certain games and a caching HDD for others. There is practically no noticeable difference playing games from different drives as long as you understand what each program/games needs are and store it appropriately. How do you determine this prior to installing? Good luck with that. I haven't been able to determine beforehand where to install so I move things around as needed when I notice too much latency. Personally, anything that is twitchy I put on the SSD just, well just because.
The UK handgun ban is largely irrelevant given how rare UK handgun ownership was to begin with. Even if it was then looking at how gun crime stats change immediately after a ban rather than over a longer period and in context of other events is pointless.
I went back 30 years prior to the ban (when the Home Office still had those records). The only drastic increase both prior and since was in 1997-2002. Their violent crime literally doubled in 5 years. Prior to '97 their crime increase was marginal to nonexistent, pretty much in line with population increase. There was no reason for the explosion of crime in that period. It was pretty much unprecedented.
They have since brought their crime back down to at or below 1997 levels (as a percentage of pop), but the gun ban did not work as intended. There were numerous MPs that were absolutely livid about the statistical numbers when they came out in 2002, but nothing ever came of it and any attempts to reverse the ban were defeated.
Yes, UK gun ownership was always low and gun murder (actually murder in general) low as well. The fact that it doubled immediately after the ban, while I cannot claim causation, cannot be dismissed lightly and putting the UK as a good example of gun control at work is disingenuous at best. To this day they are still dealing with massive numbers of illegal guns in the hands of criminals.
The Supreme Court rules what the Constitution means not you. A well-regulated militia has no bearing whatsoever on the right to keep and bear arms and that is exactly what they said In Heller. If that isn't disagreeing with you then I do not know what is. Your statement is not factual unless you are playing word games with the 2dA. The Constitution does not grant rights, period. It enumerates what rights the Government may not infringe upon. The Supreme Court stated that no militia membership is required to satisfy the right to keep and bear arms. Therefore, your statement that the Constitution grants this right to militias is in direct opposition to what the Court ruled. Also, the definition of "well-regulated" circa 1800 meant to be in working order or effective. Nowhere in the 2dA does it ever state that membership in such a body was required, only that in order to have such a body the people need arms and as such the government may never infringe upon this right.
I had a brief look at the stats - i live in the uk, where pistols are completely illegal to own, and shotgun and rifle possession is rare and heavily regulated. Policemen carry a truncheon! Murder rates in the uk are 1.2(per 100k population per year) Murder rates in the US are 4.7(ditto) Simple?
You left out the fact that after 1997, when the UK implemented its handgun ban, murders with handguns doubled over the next 5 years (not that they were all that high to begin with). Violent crime doubled and violent crime with firearms (not including air-weapons) quadrupled. (Home Office Statistical Bulletin Jan 2002). The UK has *always* had low murder rates both prior to and after your ban, but it took close to 12 years after your ban was put in place to get your murder rates back down to where they started prior to 1997. That is not exactly a shining example of gun control done right. That is also not mentioning the fact that the UK press estimates 4-5 million illegal guns on the streets in the UK as well as the fact that they did a survey and 1 in 5 Brits know where to get a gun if they need one. Again, not the shining example of working gun control.
I hate getting into a gun control debate on this thread and replying to an AC to boot but.... what massive killings? Out of a nation of 300 million we have approx ~15k gun deaths annually. Granted, any death is tragic but I would hardly call it massive compared to other causes of death. The majority of these are criminal with accidental and suicides thrown in. Even if you make the case that all of the suicides would have been saved (good luck making that case), criminals will still be able to get weapons since they are...(wait for it) criminals.
The UK tried this in 97. In the 5 years after their gun ban violent crime doubled, violent crime with handguns (not including air weapons) quadrupled and handgun murders doubled (Home Office Statistical Bulletin Jan 2003). It took them another 7 years to get their crime back down to where it started in the first place. All this for a nation that had an annual gun homicide rate of 50 in 1997. As it is, today they estimate there are in excess of 5 million illegal guns on the streets of the UK (as reported by the UK press) and that 1 in 5 Brits know how to get a gun if they need one. This is gun control working? Also keep in mind the UK is an island, has 1/10 the population of the US and even they cannot control guns effectively. Exactly how are we to do it when we can't even keep illegal drugs out (and that is a whole different can of worms).
Guns are not the problem. We have a violent society and we are no longer properly identifying and caring for our mentally ill citizens. We need to fix the cause not the result.
My High School was lucky enough to have one gifted to it. Apparently, Hugh Hefner (Yes, *that* Hugh Hefner) was an alumnus of my High School and had his daughter come to the school to present the check. I remember learning Assembly, Fortran, Watfiv, PL\1 and I think Cobol as well as rudimentary LED and circuit logic either on it or the IBM 360 downtown. Yes, once upon a time the Chicago public school system had a very good education system. I even remember breaking into the 360 and messing with other school's (and students) teachers assignments (teacher's password: pencil....really?! and taped to the desk next to their terminal. /facepalm).
How do you know it's not government cheese?
Because it just sits there all day, doing nothing and is of no real use....errr hmmm, you may have a point there.
Not only silly FUCKING annoying. The dogs tail sets of the Kinect all the time and worse when I was playing Skyrim **FUCKING DIALOGUE** activated commands in the game.
All I want from Kinect is a Gesis style visualizer for music with interaction.
Saw this little idea on another site (wish I could take credit for it, but meh). Sony creates new ad campaign. Ad starts out with "XBox, Off!"
Troll level - Over 9000!!
hehehe
and a couple ex-girlfriends
Speaking of your ex-gf, how IS your sister doing ;)
Hey, you leave my wif...err sister out of this. ;)
I think it will be *least* popular in West Virginia...don't ask, don't tell XD
Hey, I have relatives in West Virginia you insensitive clod!
.....and a couple ex-girlfriends
....don't ask.
That is called deduplication and most modern SAN systems have this feature. You can have both thin-provisioning and deduplication for increased savings. In Mr. Dotcoms business model I doubt he will get many exact duplicate files, but that really doesn't matter because you can still deduplicate similar binary strings within differing binary files or as you said duplicate blocks. In any case dedupe and thin-prov are not mutually exclusive, you can do both.
Normally dedupe is more efficient for backups or when used on the disk target for a virtual environment since you only need one copy of notepad.exe if you are hosting 200+ windows servers. The same applies to unchanging files in *nix systems. The thing is you *have* to have some way to "present" the 50GB of promised space. While you may use dedupe or any other method to reduce your storage footprint the end user wants to see that storage. You either have to present that space raw, which comitts it from the SAN or as a thin-provisioned LUN with only the bare minimum of space actually reserved. How you store those files after the fact is up to you as the hosting company, but if you promise 50GB of space the user will want to see that space available.
This weird criminal somehow has 50 GB * 1,000,000 = 47.6 petabytes of enterprise storage? Without getting one dollar? How is this paid for? Not to mention all the data traffic back and forth which will be even more expensive?
Depending on the backend SAN he has, you can use thin-provisioning since there will not be a demand from all users for the entirety of their storage immediately. He can install 50 or so TB, provision that out then add the rest as needed, when needed. The user will see 50gb available but until they actually upload a certain percentage of that they don't actually have that amount of storage. Since the vast majority won't be uploading that in the near term he can do this until there is a demand for it.
Even adding in duplication for backups that only means 100TB. 100TB SAN is not that expensive actually. Since this is storage and not active access you can load it up with inexpensive 1TB SATA disks vs FC.
And the bill to get that passed would have 100 amendments having nothing to do with outlawing amendments!
LOL. I wish I had mod points to give you. That about made me spew coffee all over my screen. Well done sir! :)
Oh for mod points....you almost made me spray coffee all over my screen.
That's a really interesting point. In the minds of the Framers, the press was literally that - the printing press, an object. Certainly Thomas Paine (who published Common Sense anonymously) didn't have a journalism degree, nor ascribe to the other journalistic criteria the judge in this case is enumerating.
...and this has nothing to do with her right to publish. Only whether she can be sued for libel for *what* she published. Taking your example, Thomas Paine would be sued if he wrote and published libelous material. Nothing is *preventing* him from doing so, but nothing is protecting him from the repercussions for said writings.
Shield laws, as others have stated, are a modern device. They did not exist during Thomas Paine's time. If you published lies, you could be sued then as today. If she wants to qualify for Shield protection there are certain qualifications that we require from her. That she did not have *any* of them is of paramount importance here. She did not fact check, she did not get both sides of the story she did not even bother with the basic 5 Ws of Journalism.
If she had evidenced even *some* of the requirements the judge outlined, she might have been ok. That she had none makes her a hack on a personal vendetta whether her accusations are true or not. The judge was correct in this case and it does not weaken the 1st Amendment in any way. This particular blogger is not a journalist. I do not believe this decision does anything to any other blogger but give them a wakeup call. If you want to be treated like journalists, start acting like one. Granted our current media rarely, if ever, act like journalists either but that is a separate rant.
Nothing in this decision diminishes or even impacts Freedom of the Press. Anyone can print anything they like, but just like Freedom of Speech does not grant you the right to scream fire in a crowded thater Freedom of the Press does not automatically exempt you from the repercussions arising from your writings.
That means they have username and password stored in plaintext. Somebody is gonna hack that database.
Hell, it means they are probably transmitting them in clear text. Just sniff the traffic to the website.
KeyPass is awesome. Let it generate a very long, strong password for every site or purpose you need and you need only remember one password. Save that password in a safe place and give that to your children. I put the db up on Dropbox so I can access my passwords anywhere I can get internet access (and yes I have a strong master password as well).
Only one caveat for the auto generated passwords. Make sure the site you are generating the password for actually accepts the length password you are generating. I had an issue where I generated a 20 char password for my online banking. It acted like it took the password but when I tried to use it the login process only accepted 16 char passwords (and no, cutting the last 4 or first 4 char off the password didn't work), just an fyi there.
Oh for mod points....you made me choke on my coffee. lol
It's obvious that NetFlix doesn't understand its customers anymore (if it ever did.) What I used to take as excellent customer focused strategy now seems to have been completely accidental. Every customer facing change they've made over the past few years has made the NetFlix experience progressively worse. At this point, I've had enough of their confused thrashing, and will still be cancelling my subscription. I checked my records, I joined NetFlix in 2004, and used to have a 3 DVD plan, but inf recent years have dropped to 1 DVD, then no DVDs, and now, no NetFlix.
Same here, the last announcement caused me to cancel that day and made me take another look at Blockbuster. After the price jump I had to drop down to 2 DVDs. With BB I'm back to 3 and get Blu-ray and games for no extra charge. Granted, Netflix has the most amazing search and recommendation system around, but I can't justify staying with them for that and frankly I don't trust them anymore. If that insane CEO leaves I *may* try them again, but as long as that idiot is leading things I am staying away.
Anytime I hear Monty Python and computing used in the same sentence I think of this....
LiveVault
I can't say I didn't fantasize about throwing a supermagnet into the data center of an ex-employer I was downsized from, but I knew better and the majority of adults I hope would know better too.
Yeah, I have had those fantasies too. You don't realize just how much damage you can do until you sit and think about it. After being let go by a retail chain with about 700 stores I realized that in about 15min I could pretty much put the entire chain out of business. They had just scrapped all their phones for VOIP and I had the passwords to all the routers and knew they had the domain admin password hardcoded into the mainframe (I had tried, unsuccessfully for over a year to get them to change that). It would have been very easy to vpn in using the admin account, telnet to the furthest VOIP router and erase mem my way back to the office effectively wiping out their phone network. Then, set the tape robot to bulk erase (they didn't use offsite storage - too expensive), wipe the fileserver, domain controllers, AIX and Linux and logoff. They also refused to buy any intrusion detection software so very little chance of getting caught. I would never do that, but it gave me a little perverse pleasure knowing that I could.
That company is still in business and I know of at least two instances where they have had breaches due to their refusal to implement even the most basic of security precautions. Still, I should thank them for canning me. I now work for a Fortune 500 company making more than double what they were paying, so all's well that ends well I guess.
Having spent a little over 6 years in the Marines I never saw a single operation that combined Air Force with Marines. I was involved in numerous combined arms operations both state side and overseas and not once were Air Force personnel involved nor was there any Air Force material or equipment ever used in support of Marine operations, so pardon me if I call bull. They may pay lip service to those ideas, they might even have those goals written down, but in practice it does not happen.
In a protracted war, I am sure the lines will be blurred, but it has always been that the Air Force has more of a support obligation for the Army and not the Marines. We got our support from the Navy and from our own Air units. Also to note, the GP stated that the Air Forces ONLY responsibility is to support the Marines, which is completely off, no matter how you slice it.