Right there, first sentence, I was lost. Girlfriend? Huh?
This is slashdot, right? Oh look, shiny robot. Neat!
That part had me confused too. I will Google "girlfriend" as soon as I get to the next blacksmith level in Fable 2. I set the system clock back and need to buy some properties before resetting it. This game never gets old:) I think my Roomba is eyeing me though.
No kidding. You mean, the exact same thing I stated in the post you replied to? And in my follow-up post with the statement, "Which is a far more deterring effect than turning a city into a ghost town."
You still haven't answered the question: WHY SHOULD THEY BE CLEANER?
As I said before, dirty makes for a more effective deterrent.
Arrrrgh! sorry man got my posts mixed up...
This is completely for political reasons and yes they seem really hypocritical. In other words it's horrific that we have the power to wipe out millions of lives in the blink of an eye. But at least there ecologically friendly.
I would say got to love politics but I don't and nobody should.
You still haven't answered the question: WHY? What possible use could such weapons be?
Simply put they're a deterent.
I don't believe in spanking as a regular form of punishment. I usually just make sure my children understand that their are consequences for their attitudes. I take away their NintendoDS if they don't do their homework and talk to them earnestly/bluntly about why doing well in school is important.
To check myself one time I asked my 9 year old why he was so good and listened to what I asked of him. He said it was because he was afraid I would spank him. I was floored since I never layed a hand on him but out of kindness and never even threatened him. But by his own admission he only listened to me because he thought I might spank him. But the point is that human nature is to obey the idea of punishment.
That is where the analogy ends since I think if I had spanked him he probably would have realized by now, like I did at his age, that it isn't that big a deal once you get to a certain age/size. Unless your parents are abusive but that's another topic. I was uncontrollable from that age on because I thought I had nothing to fear. So of course I got into all kinds of trouble from other authority than my parents.
Yes in my opinion the other countries need to think we are willing to exact retribution mafia style. Your right if you think that actual retribution is pointless by then it's too late. They need to fear possible retribution in order for it to work. It would be nice if love was enough but time and time again it has been proven whether we like it or not fear works much better. Then we can talk to them earnestly/bluntly about why getting along is important.
What this guy is complaining about is that he wasn't able to wrest control of cybersecurity away from NSA.
Exactly, my buildings security personnel are not in charge of the IT group they are our customer and we take their needs into account. If you work in IT (this is/. right?) would you like your security guys telling you how to manage the network/PC's.
I would like to point out that what he was objecting to was the chain of command. You could use the analogy of a large company building. Like where I work.
I am in IT and we take security seriously but I don't answer to the building security personnel or their supervisors. This was the old mindset. I have seen old org charts where security, IT, and janitors are all lumped under facilities.
I administer the servers that control the badging and access cards. I work closely with them on many projects involving those systems. They make the call on what goes into the system and I make it work. That is only about 10% of what I do. I wouldn't dream of asking them anything about securing our network or the print/file servers. Nor would I expect them to know anything about how.
From NSA's point of view security is everything as well it should be.However, the vast majority of work I do, although it's secure, is not "security" related. I also work closely with HR, the Engineers and other special crews that use server data in their work.
Most companies in the private sector have realized Information Technology is no longer a part of any other department it is it's own department. With it's own specific needs.
since we can't remember how to make the 1980's era stuff, let's make something new and innovative.
really? We would rather have stuff from the 1980's?
I agree new technology would probably rock. But look how long they where using old tech in the space shuttle. They have a hard time letting go of the past. Also they did what they had to back then.
A lot of times people think things are impossible so they won't even try. If you can believe the History channel then the way they made the necessary materials would seem impossible by today's standards. I suspect that may be part of the problem here. I bet they have some instructions but don't believe that they are real because it calls for the blood of thousand virgins or something equally ridiculous.
In the end, our nuclear arsenal serves one purpose: deterrence. Whoever might want to lob nukes out way is aware that we have nukes of our own to lob back. And we WANT those nukes to be as eco-unfriendly as possible so that they won't do any stupid calculations like "we'll take out 20 million of their's in exchange for 1 million of ours." Instead, the calculation should be, "if we kill 20 million of their's, we die."
I agree with AKA and Spaz that there are plenty of countries that hate us. But I have to go with Spaz on the idea that they should not be dirty nukes. BTW we have clean nukes they are called neutron bombs they are not science fiction. We outlawed them on American soil. But we have a bunch over in Germany they used to be pointing at Russia. Don't know whatever happened to them.
have an aura of being more secure than ie or microsoft, simply because they have been tested less than ie or microsoft, simply because they have less market penetration, and therefore less hackers aim their minds at firefox or mac than at ie or microsoft. in other words, ie and microsoft are more "battlehardened" than firefox or mac
if you were a general in a war, and you had to choose between two guns, and
gun #1: backfires and kills the gunman every 1,000 rounds, as proven by solid combat use
gun #2: backfires and kills the gunman every unknown number of rounds, unproven in combat use
you tend to choose gun #1. because you are a GENERAL, which is a type of bureaucrat, which is a person who is extremely conservative and careful. you are not the r&d department
this is the thinking of the bureaucrats in colorado, who, like all government figureheads, are extremely conservative careful and slow on the uptake. as they SHOULD be. it is not the job of government to suggest the less battle tested. that is your job
just make sure you have enough wisdom that you don't expect a bureaucrat to act like a progressive. sorry, not in the job description. you will nowhere on the face of this earth find a government mandarin who is risk taking and countercultural and daring in their thinking
therefore, the error is not in the official word of the state of colorado. the error is yours: expecting a government figurehead to be a progressive influence
...a disproportionate number of Swedes tend to move abroad; not just academics and other highly skilled people, but "ordinary" people too. There is very little debate about it, and no screaming about "brain drain". The reason is that the vast majority eventually return. It may take three, or five, or ten years, but most come back and bringing with them more skills and experience, making it a net win for the country...
Here here, this is the way to really raise the standard of living for the world. Many have thought that they would have to take a forced approach by simultaneously lowering many peoples standard of living in "rich" countries as well as raise it in the countries were it is the lowest. But this is a simpler and much more natural solution. As people churn around the planet we all benefit from a normalization of standard of living.
You kind of hit on where this is all heading. We have shows and movies on demand. Music is getting there even though certain organizations are fighting it. Information in general is to a great degree at our fingertips on the interwebs. Even real time data from traffic cameras etc.
At some point we simple become the nexus of all this data. On one hand we are freed from having to hoard information like many professional had to in the past. On the other hand personally I find it addicting. I haven't gone more than a week without internet since the 90's and even then I had my cell phone.
Maybe. Probably a better question is why are we allowing google to continue doing this at all? Shouldn't it be an opt-in service rather than opt-out? Shouldn't it have always been that way?
I can understand indexing web based content that is already on line and publicly accessible, but if I write a book, I want to be in control of where, when, and how it gets presented to the reader, at least initially anyway. I don't mind (or care) what an individual does once it's 'out there' - from format shifting to selling it at a used book store or giving away. I'm not so keen on the idea of google making a copy for the entire world to readily view a large chunk of it all.
Sure google could probably make me more money through exposure that I might not otherwise have, but shouldn't that be my choice?
Let me sum up. Sometimes it's easier to ask for forgiveness than permission. Every married man knows this.
slashdot chorus of "let us hack away at our bodies, and use all the mind altering substances we want, the enemy here is just narrow-minded busy bodies"
there is a subtle philosophical issue at play here, and the issue is self-perception. for example: you win a chess match, or ace an exam, or win the nobel prize, while under the influence of a concentration enhancing drug, or with some sort of technological mind alteration
the question is: did YOU achieve something, or did your modification achieve something?
what happens is we develop a poverty of self-perception. you begin to think: without various crutches, i cannot achieve what i achieved. such that you have no confidence, and you have no real self-regard. you begin to think of yourself as just a piece of meat channeling some sort of technology or drug. that you yourself are not the key to your own performance
...
Having just taken my cognition enhancer. I have just had an epiphany. This conversation is only a distraction and waste of time as/. is populated mostly by Trolls. I just realized I am a Troll. So that is why I enjoy it here.
To say something on topic. It was Abraham Maslow who said.
If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail.
So any tool will change how we perceive the ourselves and the world. But this can not be totally avoided and there will be room for those who wish to follow either path. Oh wait it is wearing off...
Feel the urge to Troll comming back...
I am sick and tired of everyone being sick and tired. If I loath myself so much I want to modify my brain and body let me. Go on and develop your mind but leave me out of it and hug a tree while your at it.
Why? What specifically is valuable about people who know me? How does who I know affect how well I can do my job?
I met someone once when I was a field tech. Only once, we got to talking and added each other to our linkedin network. I have gotten several side jobs from people he knew, not even him. We recommended each other. That is the value of networking rather than going to an old fashoned interview in a monkey suite and having them check your network. I really don't think most people even Google their job candidates... yet.
Again, how exactly does who I know affect how competent I am at my job?
And if the answer is "it doesn't, but they might want to know anyway" - why isn't it possible that they might decide *not* to hire me, based on the people I know?
They probably wouldn't decide not to hire you based on your network. But I could see how it might be a benefit to show them you are connected. It would depend on the industry you work in. Always use discretion remember what happened when you posted those pics on Myspace.
You kind of touched on the reason they block outside the US - the ads
They know if you are not in the US you probably are not going to go downtown Sacramento and purchase a car from Downtown Ford. So how do they get their ad revenue? Maybe in the future they will do the region detect thing and give you ads you might want to see. But then they are competing with the media guys in downtown Davenshire and they are used to being the only show in town and will be upset.
The absence of preconceptions is identical to the consciousness of ignorance.
This is why anytime I hear someone say they are sure of something I just smile and nod. Or activists who say "The debate is over we are right" They are merely exposing their own ignorance. It is telling that I often hear this about things that they feel have been debunked but 3/4 of the population still believe.
This move by Hulu is unfortunate but in hind site it was inevitable. Everyone likes money, especially if you no longer have to work for it. That is why the media providers are so resistant to the new way the world works. By ShieldWolf's definition they have gone insane. Hopefully it is a temporary condition.
Yes we encrypt every device(With the exception of PC's). We have not implemented the insert=forced encrypt yet because there are certain software products that use usb dongles that would be encrypted by that policy and they have not worked that out yet. Cameras are a pain and our work requires we use them they are the few times we get viruses although that is not an encryption issue.
We don't use an open source product except TruCrypt on some of my own portable HDD's. I am pushing that more so we don't have to buy licenses for every piece of hardware. Automation (see below) is a step in that direction. My experiences may still help.
First where I do use TruCrypt I set up a batch file that opens a simple prompt so the user just enters a password and the drive becomes accessible. The batch file and the TrueCrypt executable both reside on a small unencrypted partition on the drive in question with an autorun.inf file pointing to the batch file. To automatically mount any encrypted volume it sees on the disk you just inserted it goes something like this: TrueCrypt\TrueCrypt/a devices/q/e/rm
Second we use Encryption Plus Hard Disk for our laptops. PC's are not encrypted we invested in a controlled access security system instead of purchasing licenses for all PC's although unlike other/.'rs I can see why you might want to encrypt everything. If your building security is not super tight or just not possible. You have to weigh the possiblity of theft of equiptment against how sensitive your data is.
Like TrueCrypt our software loads a driver that encrypts and decrypts everything written to the HDD. As you probably know computers aren't always writing to the HDD. So the idea that you'll take a huge performance hit is kind of a misnomer. We have laptops that range from Pentium III's to the latest cpu's. If the laptop is excruciatingly slow to begin with then encrypting the HDD will only make it slightly more excruciating. If the cpu is more current then the user will not notice the difference.
Yes people loose passwords and forget the challenge questions. Unfortunately here we don't have a good procedure in place to reset them remotely. We have them bring them in and we enter the admin password. Even if the HDD crashes we can pop in the decryption CD and get their data about 50% of the time. Which is not all that far off from the recovery achieved from our unencrypted PC's after HDD crashes.
In conclusion having imaged and encrypted hundreds of PC's I would say unless you choose the wrong algorithm don't worry to much about performance issues. The most basic algorithms will stop 99% of common thief's from getting at your data. Of course if your worried about the uncommon ones you may have to weigh protection verses performance.
Forget the lawsuits. Ask the researchers if they'd be willing to be connected to the lie detectors and to then testify that their research and conclusions were made in good faith.
If the detectors indicate a lie, the situation doesn't really change. But if the detectors do not indicate a lie, the manufacturer is pretty well cornered.
Good, except I would also like to see the Nemesysco guys hooked up. Then ask them to explain how accurate their device is? Admittedly not a productive endeavor but it would be entertaining. Imagine if device said they were lying about the devices accuracy the scientists in the room heads would explode in an infinite logic loop.
Your assertion makes as much sense as claiming a city can legalize murder within its boundaries. It doesn't matter if they pass a law, since it is violates a higher law.
States are allowed to make their own laws. The United States is a federation not a dictatorship. Murder was perhaps an unfortunate choice to look at since different states actually do have different punishments for this crime. I would be wary of comparing Homosexuality to a crime as well. Even though in the known human history it has been at times it is not currently and that way of thinking is counter productive.
/. generally bemoans the fact that normal users don't use Linux, and that people just assume Windows for everything. And yet here is a normal person, trying to use it, and finding it frustrating and causing her problems, and people mock her attempt.
What everyone seems to be missing is the fact that Verizon and the College both worked with her to "fix" her computer. This is a big improvement over the "sorry not compatible" response of the past. Perhaps Linux really has finally arrived.
I think you misread that (Mentally Ill, not Challenged), a variety of criminal acts can be attributed to mental illness especially with schizophren and missed medications for thing like depression. A mother suffering from postpartum depression and drowns her kids is more likely the result of the biological issues rather then some concious malevolence. We are ruling those out as those acts are more then likely the result of a biological root cause (John Cage like stuff). I think you are confusing the two.
Slashdot Mirror
...trolling Slashdot subscriber...
Isn't that redundant?
Maybe Norton's anti-virus is so good that even THEY can't get a virus past it? ;)
You owe me one keyboard and monitor mine now has coffee all over it.
Ever had a super needy girlfriend...
Right there, first sentence, I was lost. Girlfriend? Huh?
This is slashdot, right? Oh look, shiny robot. Neat!
That part had me confused too. I will Google "girlfriend" as soon as I get to the next blacksmith level in Fable 2. I set the system clock back and need to buy some properties before resetting it. This game never gets old :) I think my Roomba is eyeing me though.
No kidding. You mean, the exact same thing I stated in the post you replied to? And in my follow-up post with the statement, "Which is a far more deterring effect than turning a city into a ghost town."
You still haven't answered the question: WHY SHOULD THEY BE CLEANER?
As I said before, dirty makes for a more effective deterrent.
Arrrrgh! sorry man got my posts mixed up...
This is completely for political reasons and yes they seem really hypocritical. In other words it's horrific that we have the power to wipe out millions of lives in the blink of an eye. But at least there ecologically friendly.
I would say got to love politics but I don't and nobody should.
Simply put they're a deterent.
I don't believe in spanking as a regular form of punishment. I usually just make sure my children understand that their are consequences for their attitudes. I take away their NintendoDS if they don't do their homework and talk to them earnestly/bluntly about why doing well in school is important.
To check myself one time I asked my 9 year old why he was so good and listened to what I asked of him. He said it was because he was afraid I would spank him. I was floored since I never layed a hand on him but out of kindness and never even threatened him. But by his own admission he only listened to me because he thought I might spank him. But the point is that human nature is to obey the idea of punishment.
That is where the analogy ends since I think if I had spanked him he probably would have realized by now, like I did at his age, that it isn't that big a deal once you get to a certain age/size. Unless your parents are abusive but that's another topic. I was uncontrollable from that age on because I thought I had nothing to fear. So of course I got into all kinds of trouble from other authority than my parents.
Yes in my opinion the other countries need to think we are willing to exact retribution mafia style. Your right if you think that actual retribution is pointless by then it's too late. They need to fear possible retribution in order for it to work. It would be nice if love was enough but time and time again it has been proven whether we like it or not fear works much better. Then we can talk to them earnestly/bluntly about why getting along is important.
...
What this guy is complaining about is that he wasn't able to wrest control of cybersecurity away from NSA.
Exactly, my buildings security personnel are not in charge of the IT group they are our customer and we take their needs into account. If you work in IT (this is /. right?) would you like your security guys telling you how to manage the network/PC's.
I would like to point out that what he was objecting to was the chain of command. You could use the analogy of a large company building. Like where I work.
I am in IT and we take security seriously but I don't answer to the building security personnel or their supervisors. This was the old mindset. I have seen old org charts where security, IT, and janitors are all lumped under facilities.
I administer the servers that control the badging and access cards. I work closely with them on many projects involving those systems. They make the call on what goes into the system and I make it work. That is only about 10% of what I do. I wouldn't dream of asking them anything about securing our network or the print/file servers. Nor would I expect them to know anything about how.
From NSA's point of view security is everything as well it should be.However, the vast majority of work I do, although it's secure, is not "security" related. I also work closely with HR, the Engineers and other special crews that use server data in their work.
Most companies in the private sector have realized Information Technology is no longer a part of any other department it is it's own department. With it's own specific needs.
since we can't remember how to make the 1980's era stuff, let's make something new and innovative.
really? We would rather have stuff from the 1980's?
I agree new technology would probably rock. But look how long they where using old tech in the space shuttle. They have a hard time letting go of the past. Also they did what they had to back then. A lot of times people think things are impossible so they won't even try. If you can believe the History channel then the way they made the necessary materials would seem impossible by today's standards. I suspect that may be part of the problem here. I bet they have some instructions but don't believe that they are real because it calls for the blood of thousand virgins or something equally ridiculous.
In the end, our nuclear arsenal serves one purpose: deterrence. Whoever might want to lob nukes out way is aware that we have nukes of our own to lob back. And we WANT those nukes to be as eco-unfriendly as possible so that they won't do any stupid calculations like "we'll take out 20 million of their's in exchange for 1 million of ours." Instead, the calculation should be, "if we kill 20 million of their's, we die."
I agree with AKA and Spaz that there are plenty of countries that hate us. But I have to go with Spaz on the idea that they should not be dirty nukes. BTW we have clean nukes they are called neutron bombs they are not science fiction. We outlawed them on American soil. But we have a bunch over in Germany they used to be pointing at Russia. Don't know whatever happened to them.
have an aura of being more secure than ie or microsoft, simply because they have been tested less than ie or microsoft, simply because they have less market penetration, and therefore less hackers aim their minds at firefox or mac than at ie or microsoft. in other words, ie and microsoft are more "battlehardened" than firefox or mac
if you were a general in a war, and you had to choose between two guns, and
gun #1: backfires and kills the gunman every 1,000 rounds, as proven by solid combat use
gun #2: backfires and kills the gunman every unknown number of rounds, unproven in combat use
you tend to choose gun #1. because you are a GENERAL, which is a type of bureaucrat, which is a person who is extremely conservative and careful. you are not the r&d department
this is the thinking of the bureaucrats in colorado, who, like all government figureheads, are extremely conservative careful and slow on the uptake. as they SHOULD be. it is not the job of government to suggest the less battle tested. that is your job
just make sure you have enough wisdom that you don't expect a bureaucrat to act like a progressive. sorry, not in the job description. you will nowhere on the face of this earth find a government mandarin who is risk taking and countercultural and daring in their thinking
therefore, the error is not in the official word of the state of colorado. the error is yours: expecting a government figurehead to be a progressive influence
Mod Parent up +1 insightful
...a disproportionate number of Swedes tend to move abroad; not just academics and other highly skilled people, but "ordinary" people too. There is very little debate about it, and no screaming about "brain drain". The reason is that the vast majority eventually return. It may take three, or five, or ten years, but most come back and bringing with them more skills and experience, making it a net win for the country...
Here here, this is the way to really raise the standard of living for the world. Many have thought that they would have to take a forced approach by simultaneously lowering many peoples standard of living in "rich" countries as well as raise it in the countries were it is the lowest. But this is a simpler and much more natural solution. As people churn around the planet we all benefit from a normalization of standard of living.
You kind of hit on where this is all heading. We have shows and movies on demand. Music is getting there even though certain organizations are fighting it. Information in general is to a great degree at our fingertips on the interwebs. Even real time data from traffic cameras etc.
At some point we simple become the nexus of all this data. On one hand we are freed from having to hoard information like many professional had to in the past. On the other hand personally I find it addicting. I haven't gone more than a week without internet since the 90's and even then I had my cell phone.
Maybe. Probably a better question is why are we allowing google to continue doing this at all? Shouldn't it be an opt-in service rather than opt-out? Shouldn't it have always been that way?
I can understand indexing web based content that is already on line and publicly accessible, but if I write a book, I want to be in control of where, when, and how it gets presented to the reader, at least initially anyway. I don't mind (or care) what an individual does once it's 'out there' - from format shifting to selling it at a used book store or giving away. I'm not so keen on the idea of google making a copy for the entire world to readily view a large chunk of it all.
Sure google could probably make me more money through exposure that I might not otherwise have, but shouldn't that be my choice?
Let me sum up. Sometimes it's easier to ask for forgiveness than permission. Every married man knows this.
Its got what market craves. Its got electrolytes.
Do you even know what electrolytes are?
~long pause~...~looks confused~
There what market craves.?
slashdot chorus of "let us hack away at our bodies, and use all the mind altering substances we want, the enemy here is just narrow-minded busy bodies"
there is a subtle philosophical issue at play here, and the issue is self-perception. for example: you win a chess match, or ace an exam, or win the nobel prize, while under the influence of a concentration enhancing drug, or with some sort of technological mind alteration
the question is: did YOU achieve something, or did your modification achieve something?
what happens is we develop a poverty of self-perception. you begin to think: without various crutches, i cannot achieve what i achieved. such that you have no confidence, and you have no real self-regard. you begin to think of yourself as just a piece of meat channeling some sort of technology or drug. that you yourself are not the key to your own performance
...
Having just taken my cognition enhancer. I have just had an epiphany. This conversation is only a distraction and waste of time as /. is populated mostly by Trolls. I just realized I am a Troll. So that is why I enjoy it here.
To say something on topic. It was Abraham Maslow who said.
If the only tool you have is a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail.
So any tool will change how we perceive the ourselves and the world. But this can not be totally avoided and there will be room for those who wish to follow either path. Oh wait it is wearing off...
Feel the urge to Troll comming back...
I am sick and tired of everyone being sick and tired. If I loath myself so much I want to modify my brain and body let me. Go on and develop your mind but leave me out of it and hug a tree while your at it.
Why? What specifically is valuable about people who know me? How does who I know affect how well I can do my job?
I met someone once when I was a field tech. Only once, we got to talking and added each other to our linkedin network. I have gotten several side jobs from people he knew, not even him. We recommended each other. That is the value of networking rather than going to an old fashoned interview in a monkey suite and having them check your network. I really don't think most people even Google their job candidates... yet.
Again, how exactly does who I know affect how competent I am at my job?
And if the answer is "it doesn't, but they might want to know anyway" - why isn't it possible that they might decide *not* to hire me, based on the people I know?
They probably wouldn't decide not to hire you based on your network. But I could see how it might be a benefit to show them you are connected. It would depend on the industry you work in. Always use discretion remember what happened when you posted those pics on Myspace.
You kind of touched on the reason they block outside the US - the ads
They know if you are not in the US you probably are not going to go downtown Sacramento and purchase a car from Downtown Ford. So how do they get their ad revenue? Maybe in the future they will do the region detect thing and give you ads you might want to see. But then they are competing with the media guys in downtown Davenshire and they are used to being the only show in town and will be upset.
The absence of preconceptions is identical to the consciousness of ignorance.
This is why anytime I hear someone say they are sure of something I just smile and nod. Or activists who say "The debate is over we are right" They are merely exposing their own ignorance. It is telling that I often hear this about things that they feel have been debunked but 3/4 of the population still believe.
This move by Hulu is unfortunate but in hind site it was inevitable. Everyone likes money, especially if you no longer have to work for it. That is why the media providers are so resistant to the new way the world works. By ShieldWolf's definition they have gone insane. Hopefully it is a temporary condition.
Yes we encrypt every device(With the exception of PC's). We have not implemented the insert=forced encrypt yet because there are certain software products that use usb dongles that would be encrypted by that policy and they have not worked that out yet. Cameras are a pain and our work requires we use them they are the few times we get viruses although that is not an encryption issue.
/a devices /q /e /rm
/.'rs I can see why you might want to encrypt everything. If your building security is not super tight or just not possible. You have to weigh the possiblity of theft of equiptment against how sensitive your data is.
We don't use an open source product except TruCrypt on some of my own portable HDD's. I am pushing that more so we don't have to buy licenses for every piece of hardware. Automation (see below) is a step in that direction. My experiences may still help.
First where I do use TruCrypt I set up a batch file that opens a simple prompt so the user just enters a password and the drive becomes accessible. The batch file and the TrueCrypt executable both reside on a small unencrypted partition on the drive in question with an autorun.inf file pointing to the batch file. To automatically mount any encrypted volume it sees on the disk you just inserted it goes something like this:
TrueCrypt\TrueCrypt
Second we use Encryption Plus Hard Disk for our laptops. PC's are not encrypted we invested in a controlled access security system instead of purchasing licenses for all PC's although unlike other
Like TrueCrypt our software loads a driver that encrypts and decrypts everything written to the HDD. As you probably know computers aren't always writing to the HDD. So the idea that you'll take a huge performance hit is kind of a misnomer. We have laptops that range from Pentium III's to the latest cpu's. If the laptop is excruciatingly slow to begin with then encrypting the HDD will only make it slightly more excruciating. If the cpu is more current then the user will not notice the difference.
Yes people loose passwords and forget the challenge questions. Unfortunately here we don't have a good procedure in place to reset them remotely. We have them bring them in and we enter the admin password. Even if the HDD crashes we can pop in the decryption CD and get their data about 50% of the time. Which is not all that far off from the recovery achieved from our unencrypted PC's after HDD crashes.
In conclusion having imaged and encrypted hundreds of PC's I would say unless you choose the wrong algorithm don't worry to much about performance issues. The most basic algorithms will stop 99% of common thief's from getting at your data. Of course if your worried about the uncommon ones you may have to weigh protection verses performance.
Forget the lawsuits. Ask the researchers if they'd be willing to be connected to the lie detectors and to then testify that their research and conclusions were made in good faith.
If the detectors indicate a lie, the situation doesn't really change. But if the detectors do not indicate a lie, the manufacturer is pretty well cornered.
Good, except I would also like to see the Nemesysco guys hooked up. Then ask them to explain how accurate their device is? Admittedly not a productive endeavor but it would be entertaining. Imagine if device said they were lying about the devices accuracy the scientists in the room heads would explode in an infinite logic loop.
What, they're going to sue him for...
They can make up some stuff:
I'm not saying it's right just sayin'.
Anyone who uses slide transitions should be shot.
He didn't say shot with what. A Pez launcher maybe?
I'd say a nice simple fade makes the presentation seem more professional. If it is an annoying checkerboard or bounce out bleh! But to each his own.
Your assertion makes as much sense as claiming a city can legalize murder within its boundaries. It doesn't matter if they pass a law, since it is violates a higher law.
States are allowed to make their own laws. The United States is a federation not a dictatorship. Murder was perhaps an unfortunate choice to look at since different states actually do have different punishments for this crime. I would be wary of comparing Homosexuality to a crime as well. Even though in the known human history it has been at times it is not currently and that way of thinking is counter productive.
Why is this listed as being humorous?
Because:
What everyone seems to be missing is the fact that Verizon and the College both worked with her to "fix" her computer. This is a big improvement over the "sorry not compatible" response of the past. Perhaps Linux really has finally arrived.
I think you misread that (Mentally Ill, not Challenged), a variety of criminal acts can be attributed to mental illness especially with schizophren and missed medications for thing like depression. A mother suffering from postpartum depression and drowns her kids is more likely the result of the biological issues rather then some concious malevolence. We are ruling those out as those acts are more then likely the result of a biological root cause (John Cage like stuff). I think you are confusing the two.
I stand corrected.