If the owner leaves the WiFi access point unsecured and the DHCP server gives to my the network config info needed, then I consider this as the owners permission to use his network: my computer asked if it can join the network, the DHCP server (configured by the owner) said yes, here are the details.
"How can a company be prepared to invest into a platform that can change at any time..."
Then simply don't! And stop wining. (and now: Burn, karma, burn!)
(I don't understand the hype around the closed and restricted iPad/iPhone/iPod touch anyways. I own the later, but only run a few very selected apps. Occasionaly. Otherwise I use it to read a few web pages and e-mails before I get enough energy to get out of bed.)
How big is the chance that the oposite observation would have been the case?!
Similarly: I just made an controled experiment using a coin. Me and my 1 year younger friend got each a coin and threw it up. We agreed that head would win. He got tail, me head. So now we know, older people win when playing Head or Tails.
Maybe not political correct, but the nasty and sarcastic side of me thinks: "Pity, that the driver did not hit her more seriously. She is something our gene pool doesn't need."
Finland is just much more modern than UK or the US. I have lived there for 8 years (before studies brought myself here to the UK). Yes, no data caps there and good speed. It is surprising how much middle age the UK is.
I remember a few months in a row were I downloaded 200GB to 450GB data each month. Nobody complained at all for the usage. And no problem with the speed, either...
I disagree. I enjoy (here in the UK) unlimited internet usage at a monthly price of less than 14£ (on top of the compulsory phone line rental). And my ISP is far from being local only.
Less competition, smaller market. Also, these devices need to be developed. So the developement cost has to be regained from the small numbers of devices sold. Plus they have to make some kind of win. Laptops and mobile phones are so incredible cheap because they are sold so many times in huge quantities...
Of course there seem to be a lot of people out there who seem happy with a cheap (since subsudised) phone regardless of what draw backs this business model has. Sure, I got long term lock in contract, sure, I pay high monthly subscription plans, sure, this effectively prevents a free market adjusting the price to a good level (as horrendous early termination fees makes it unlikely for a person to switch to a different cheaper phone company)... but at least I did get the great phone for cheap! I hear this argument so so many times.
I've seen myself how cheap mobile phone usage can be when one forbids subsidised phones and long term contracts! I have seen the power of competition at work! Since I have moved from Finland to the UK I have seen the oposite (and from Germany I still know it, too), I see how expensive having a mobile phone can be when the companies are allowed to make deals which prevent competition. I do not know where you AC come from, but I guess you never saw the benefits of proper competition in the realm of mobile phones in real life! Nowadays I don't use mobile phones much so I don't care if people prefer expensive phone contracts... After all, if the majority thinks it is good... it probably must be, doesn't it?;-)
Actually I belive that the explanation "because people are idiots" is right. I have have seen myself what happens if there are rules around which prevent mobile carries to take customers hostages to their contracts for 18 or 24 months: you get the phones cheap but incredible bad contracts. For example in Finland this was forbiden for long time, with the outcome that real competition existsed and that sofisticated equipment had the price it deserved (why should a sofisticated mobile device cost 1 euro/pound/dolar?!). It turned out that this way you got much much cheaper contracts with much more freedom than in countries which did not have this rules! Why is there no company in the UK which gives you a contract which does cost 1 pound per month subscription fee and where you pay 5 pennies/minute of phone call to any (!) network in the UK (and where the length of the phone call is measured in seconds from the very beginning on) and where a text does cost 5 pennies into any network?!?
"What's the backup plan in case a massive solar flare fries our power and computing infrastructure?"... in this case the existence or non-existence of cheques would be one of the least problems. And a cheque would not buy you food or fuel. Neither would the electronic tilts work and much more...
The question is, why should transfering money between two random people be difficult? Alice tells Bob her account number (which at least in Finland contains all the information needed) and then Bob transfers the money from his account to Alice's account. The money is transfered instantly (if the account belongs to the same bank) or arrives the next day (if it is a different bank). And the bank system is organised in such a way that knowing the account number does in no way give you a possibility to access the money. So giving out account numbers to strangers does not cause a security problem. So for what reason would one need cheques?!
In my opinion cheques are basically a thing of the past. Except for the UK. And the US. And maybe some other countries which for some reason did not go with the time. But pointing this out this simple fact seems to make my carma burn...
Where is the "Sudenoutbreakofcommonsense" tag when one needs one?! When I moved to the UK about two years ago I was quite shocked that cheques did exists here and have been used so much. We are in the 21st century and one still writes paper slips which takes an insane long time to be processed and cleared!? In all the countries I lived before payment by bank transfer was the most convenient thing to do. Even transfering between states in Europa (those who are modern enough to use the same currency) is free and works nowadays like a charm! So why is UK still so much behind the state of the art?
Seriously, what does COFEE generated data prove? If my computer would run XP and for some reason some official would want to plug a USB stick with the label "COFEE" into it, then what ever data they claim to find I could deny easily that it was mine. After all, on the USB stick there could have been ANY program which plants ANY data on the computer it was plugged into!
As far as I know, part of proper computer forensics work is to first (!) dublicate the hard drive in question, then generate a checksum for both drives (which of course should be the same), and lock away one of the drives to a seperate place such that one can prove later on that nobody has changed the original hard drive and that the gathered data is authentic!
"The identification system matches images captured by surveillance cameras to an existing database of faces."... and the whole thing is meant to fail.
The system will create a huge amount of false positives which in turn will make a lot of innocent customers annoyed and cause them to never come back. On the other hand it is quite likely that it will not catch any of the people in the database. Which will be an epic fail!
"His analysis of some 30 studies showed..."... and this is precisely where one can stop reading. A sample size of 30 is far to small to make ANY statement, it doesn't even prove a weak correlation or a trend!! Why do so many studies get attention which have so small sample sizes? I can't belive it!
Simply trash it, learn the lesson and buy a proper printer next time where the company does not hide the production costs of the printer in the cartridges costs.
And why does the ABOVE reply get modded offtopic whereas all the other offtopic replies get modded interesting, insigtful and funny? If something is offtopic in this thread, then it is my post now!;-)
Slashdot Mirror
Because all U.S. citizens have highly sensitive information. And hardly any of them actually know or care about configuring the security.
If they don't care then they should also not whine if someone accesses that sensitive information...
If the owner leaves the WiFi access point unsecured and the DHCP server gives to my the network config info needed, then I consider this as the owners permission to use his network: my computer asked if it can join the network, the DHCP server (configured by the owner) said yes, here are the details.
Profit!
"How can a company be prepared to invest into a platform that can change at any time..."
Then simply don't! And stop wining. (and now: Burn, karma, burn!)
(I don't understand the hype around the closed and restricted iPad/iPhone/iPod touch anyways. I own the later, but only run a few very selected apps. Occasionaly. Otherwise I use it to read a few web pages and e-mails before I get enough energy to get out of bed.)
Yeah! I just thought the same!
How big is the chance that the oposite observation would have been the case?!
Similarly: I just made an controled experiment using a coin. Me and my 1 year younger friend got each a coin and threw it up. We agreed that head would win. He got tail, me head. So now we know, older people win when playing Head or Tails.
Still wonder to which news site to post this...
Maybe not political correct, but the nasty and sarcastic side of me thinks: "Pity, that the driver did not hit her more seriously. She is something our gene pool doesn't need."
Yeah, that emphasisement is precisely what I thought...
Downloading quite few "Linux DVD" images. ;-)
But after a few months even this gets boring... (actually I was surprised myself by the data usage)
Finland is just much more modern than UK or the US. I have lived there for 8 years (before studies brought myself here to the UK). Yes, no data caps there and good speed. It is surprising how much middle age the UK is.
I remember a few months in a row were I downloaded 200GB to 450GB data each month. Nobody complained at all for the usage. And no problem with the speed, either...
I disagree. I enjoy (here in the UK) unlimited internet usage at a monthly price of less than 14£ (on top of the compulsory phone line rental). And my ISP is far from being local only.
Less competition, smaller market. Also, these devices need to be developed. So the developement cost has to be regained from the small numbers of devices sold. Plus they have to make some kind of win. Laptops and mobile phones are so incredible cheap because they are sold so many times in huge quantities...
After all, those people are not completely incompetent, are they?
In the UK? You should reconsider your rhetorical question...
This should not be a problem IF the hard drives are full disk encrypted. Now the "if" in the previous sentence is the crucial point...
I may remind you of the fact that a Russian chatbot already passed the Turing Test (sort of): http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/12/09/1356201
Of course there seem to be a lot of people out there who seem happy with a cheap (since subsudised) phone regardless of what draw backs this business model has. Sure, I got long term lock in contract, sure, I pay high monthly subscription plans, sure, this effectively prevents a free market adjusting the price to a good level (as horrendous early termination fees makes it unlikely for a person to switch to a different cheaper phone company) ... but at least I did get the great phone for cheap! I hear this argument so so many times.
I've seen myself how cheap mobile phone usage can be when one forbids subsidised phones and long term contracts! I have seen the power of competition at work! Since I have moved from Finland to the UK I have seen the oposite (and from Germany I still know it, too), I see how expensive having a mobile phone can be when the companies are allowed to make deals which prevent competition. I do not know where you AC come from, but I guess you never saw the benefits of proper competition in the realm of mobile phones in real life! Nowadays I don't use mobile phones much so I don't care if people prefer expensive phone contracts... After all, if the majority thinks it is good ... it probably must be, doesn't it? ;-)
Actually I belive that the explanation "because people are idiots" is right. I have have seen myself what happens if there are rules around which prevent mobile carries to take customers hostages to their contracts for 18 or 24 months: you get the phones cheap but incredible bad contracts. For example in Finland this was forbiden for long time, with the outcome that real competition existsed and that sofisticated equipment had the price it deserved (why should a sofisticated mobile device cost 1 euro/pound/dolar?!). It turned out that this way you got much much cheaper contracts with much more freedom than in countries which did not have this rules! Why is there no company in the UK which gives you a contract which does cost 1 pound per month subscription fee and where you pay 5 pennies/minute of phone call to any (!) network in the UK (and where the length of the phone call is measured in seconds from the very beginning on) and where a text does cost 5 pennies into any network?!?
"What's the backup plan in case a massive solar flare fries our power and computing infrastructure?" ... in this case the existence or non-existence of cheques would be one of the least problems. And a cheque would not buy you food or fuel. Neither would the electronic tilts work and much more...
The question is, why should transfering money between two random people be difficult? Alice tells Bob her account number (which at least in Finland contains all the information needed) and then Bob transfers the money from his account to Alice's account. The money is transfered instantly (if the account belongs to the same bank) or arrives the next day (if it is a different bank). And the bank system is organised in such a way that knowing the account number does in no way give you a possibility to access the money. So giving out account numbers to strangers does not cause a security problem. So for what reason would one need cheques?!
In my opinion cheques are basically a thing of the past. Except for the UK. And the US. And maybe some other countries which for some reason did not go with the time. But pointing this out this simple fact seems to make my carma burn...
Where is the "Sudenoutbreakofcommonsense" tag when one needs one?! When I moved to the UK about two years ago I was quite shocked that cheques did exists here and have been used so much. We are in the 21st century and one still writes paper slips which takes an insane long time to be processed and cleared!? In all the countries I lived before payment by bank transfer was the most convenient thing to do. Even transfering between states in Europa (those who are modern enough to use the same currency) is free and works nowadays like a charm! So why is UK still so much behind the state of the art?
Seriously, what does COFEE generated data prove? If my computer would run XP and for some reason some official would want to plug a USB stick with the label "COFEE" into it, then what ever data they claim to find I could deny easily that it was mine. After all, on the USB stick there could have been ANY program which plants ANY data on the computer it was plugged into!
As far as I know, part of proper computer forensics work is to first (!) dublicate the hard drive in question, then generate a checksum for both drives (which of course should be the same), and lock away one of the drives to a seperate place such that one can prove later on that nobody has changed the original hard drive and that the gathered data is authentic!
But this COFEE is just pathetic!
"The identification system matches images captured by surveillance cameras to an existing database of faces." ... and the whole thing is meant to fail.
The system will create a huge amount of false positives which in turn will make a lot of innocent customers annoyed and cause them to never come back. On the other hand it is quite likely that it will not catch any of the people in the database. Which will be an epic fail!
"His analysis of some 30 studies showed..." ... and this is precisely where one can stop reading. A sample size of 30 is far to small to make ANY statement, it doesn't even prove a weak correlation or a trend!! Why do so many studies get attention which have so small sample sizes? I can't belive it!
Simply trash it, learn the lesson and buy a proper printer next time where the company does not hide the production costs of the printer in the cartridges costs.
And why does the ABOVE reply get modded offtopic whereas all the other offtopic replies get modded interesting, insigtful and funny? If something is offtopic in this thread, then it is my post now! ;-)