Scenario: Build a database with every possible social security number.
Next, start gathering whatever information you can and entering it in that database. By theft or purchase or whatever.
How long will it be before you can, digitally, "prove" that you are any person in that database?
The attacks you are talking about are just the tip of the iceberg. It would be possible to perform such fraud on a nation-wide basis. Against just about any person in the nation.
If you can solve the "identity theft" problem, you won't have to worry about this in the future. Whether kiddie porn is involved or not.
And we've been over, often enough, the various means of solving "identity theft". The problem is that the burden is on the victim, not the bank issuing the cards. Despite the bank having far more information and resources than the victim.
If we would just validate the transaction instead of the "identity" of the purchaser, we'd be able to eliminate this fraud.
I don't understand why parent is modded down. These are all valid answers to the issues listed.
No.They are not "valid answers" in a decentralized operation because there is no way you can backup the user's machines.
Saying that "backups exist" does not address the question of HOW the backups are made when the user can put any file anywhere on their system.
With a centralized system, the users can be restricted to ONLY saving files on their TEMP directory and the servers. Those are MUCH easier to backup and lots of packages exist for that exact purpose.
1. User just deleted a "critical" data directory/file.
2. User just deleted an OS directory and their computer will not run.
3. User kept everything on his/her local drive and it just caught fire.
4. User wants an email from 3 years ago that user had deleted from his/her last computer 2 years ago.
5. The legal department wants all email to/from Mr.X, Mr.Y and Mr.Z.
6. User keeps getting infected with viruses.
With centralized control, all of those are simple. Once you start allowing users to choose what to run, how to configure it and so forth, all of those become major issues.
But that is the most difficult concept to get through the head of any "religious" person. Which leads to congregations defending child molesting priests.
And therefore, it's nihilistic to impose at least a portion of seemingly ancient platitudes on generations that have no context for them.
The fundamentals NEVER change. If they did, they would not be fundamentals. From TFA:
"Everybody in my generation wants to be a leader," says Healy. "There are 22 year-olds who already say they want a leadership position, and they're ready for that. I think it's a pretty cool thing."
Everyone on the team cannot be a leader. What they WANT and what one them thinks the others are ready for does not matter.
What matters and what will ALWAYS matter are the RESULTS.
This article is beyond stupid. It's littered with "may" and "could".
Realize that the 50 year olds of today were the kids of the 60's.
SP1 addresses specific reliability and performance issues, supports new types of hardware, and adds support for several emerging standards.
Unless you have an unsupported device on your computer in which case this update will not be applied.
The question remains, why did Microsoft choose to do it that way rather than any of the other MORE PREFERABLE TO THE END USER ways that have been mentioned.:D
This mythical "retard" who is somehow a management/distribution savant?
More correctly stated, any "retard" can stuff a ballot box... and be caught doing so.
It's like saying that any "retard" can rob a bank but it takes a skilled hacker to electronically loot your accounts. It is just wrong. It is far easier to secure a physical object because people have far more experience with doing just that.
Archer seems to be postulating a perfect scenario for electronic voting. Just read TFA and the others like it.
The problem is that paper based elections are no more secure, and if the physical ballots are lost, you're screwed.
No. You do not understand "security". It is possible to have a representative from each candidate WATCH the ballot box to make sure that it is not "lost".
Even if someone is watching the computer, there is no way for them to tell if ballots are being "lost" or changed.
We need a better voting system that takes advantage of our new computing technology.
Why? What's wrong with pen and paper?
Counting and validating paper ballots is simple. As is protecting them. They are PHYSICAL objects. People have lots of experience in keeping physical objects secure.
Which is why we have "OCD" and NOT "obsessive door checking disorder".
Being that the door checking is an manifestation of OCD, not a disorder in and of itself. If you removed the door, the OCD will still be there. It will just transfer itself to something else. Such as checking the stove to make sure it is off.
And for any other anti-virus vendor who cares to implement it.
#1. A bootable CD that can give you read/write access to the local hard drive.
#2. A database (that can be updated) of what the MOST COMMON files are in which directories OF THE OS and their various identifying characteristics.
Because it is far, Far, FAR easier to validate that a certain file is "good" than to determine that it is "bad".
Simple concept, no?
Anything that cannot be identified can be "quarantined" if the user so wishes. Any data files SHOULD be easily identified.
Another benefit of this approach would be to identify files left over from incomplete un-installs.
Hey, if the various 3rd parties WANT to, they could even offer to run the un-install routine for the apps they've identified. Or to clean-up known crap.
It kind of reminds me of William Gibson's cyberspace: a free-for-all, hostile environment where it was pretty much up to individual users / corporations / governments / whatever to protect themselves through whatever means necessary.
The problem is that no matter how well YOU protect yourself, other agencies have your personal information in their databases.
What happens if your employer loses a laptop with your SSN, name, etc on it?
Eventually, the criminals are just going to start building a database with whatever information they can find.
Then they'll use that database to take out a second mortgage on your home, purchase a new car and open a few credit cards under your name.
You'll lose more money than you have. And you'll never have a chance to prevent it. Because all the information will be "leaked" from 3rd parties.
Slashdot Mirror
Someone who doesn't notice a 10x or more increase in outbound traffic?
Or, more likely, someone who just does not check the logs.
Microsoft is happy to have anything running on Windows.
Microsoft refuses to have Microsoft apps support Open Source apps.
It's all one way. It's all Microsoft's way.
Scenario: Build a database with every possible social security number.
Next, start gathering whatever information you can and entering it in that database. By theft or purchase or whatever.
How long will it be before you can, digitally, "prove" that you are any person in that database?
The attacks you are talking about are just the tip of the iceberg. It would be possible to perform such fraud on a nation-wide basis. Against just about any person in the nation.
And our system is NOT equipped to deal with such.
If you can solve the "identity theft" problem, you won't have to worry about this in the future. Whether kiddie porn is involved or not.
And we've been over, often enough, the various means of solving "identity theft". The problem is that the burden is on the victim, not the bank issuing the cards. Despite the bank having far more information and resources than the victim.
If we would just validate the transaction instead of the "identity" of the purchaser, we'd be able to eliminate this fraud.
Saying that "backups exist" does not address the question of HOW the backups are made when the user can put any file anywhere on their system.
With a centralized system, the users can be restricted to ONLY saving files on their TEMP directory and the servers. Those are MUCH easier to backup and lots of packages exist for that exact purpose.
1. User just deleted a "critical" data directory/file.
2. User just deleted an OS directory and their computer will not run.
3. User kept everything on his/her local drive and it just caught fire.
4. User wants an email from 3 years ago that user had deleted from his/her last computer 2 years ago.
5. The legal department wants all email to/from Mr.X, Mr.Y and Mr.Z.
6. User keeps getting infected with viruses.
With centralized control, all of those are simple. Once you start allowing users to choose what to run, how to configure it and so forth, all of those become major issues.
Novell is not a "Linux company". Novell is a proprietary company attempting to market themselves as a "Linux company".
Novell has some good products. But they will not port them to Debian/Ubuntu. Nor will they Open them.
Exactly.
But that is the most difficult concept to get through the head of any "religious" person. Which leads to congregations defending child molesting priests.
What matters and what will ALWAYS matter are the RESULTS.
This article is beyond stupid. It's littered with "may" and "could".
Realize that the 50 year olds of today were the kids of the 60's.
And that most Linux distributions can. For free (as in beer).
But feel free to claim that a company with BILLIONS of dollars and hundreds of programmers at their disposal MAY NOT be able to duplicate that feat.
And that's the best you have?
It always amazes me how people can be so defensive about such simple operations.
Almost every Linux distribution can manage this without any problem. Many of them doing it for free (as in beer).
And yet you're saying that Microsoft could not. Whatever.
The question remains, why did Microsoft choose to do it that way rather than any of the other MORE PREFERABLE TO THE END USER ways that have been mentioned.
You seem to believe that the service packs are nothing more than a "roll-up" of the other patches.
Here's news for you, they aren't.
Install and just disable the device?
Or rather, how about installing the parts that CAN be installed and skipping anything else?
This is about getting PATCHES in place. Not whether you have an unsupported CD-ROM and, therefore, you will not be allowed to apply the OTHER patches.
This mythical "retard" who is somehow a management/distribution savant?
... and be caught doing so.
More correctly stated, any "retard" can stuff a ballot box
It's like saying that any "retard" can rob a bank but it takes a skilled hacker to electronically loot your accounts. It is just wrong. It is far easier to secure a physical object because people have far more experience with doing just that.
Archer seems to be postulating a perfect scenario for electronic voting. Just read TFA and the others like it.
Even if someone is watching the computer, there is no way for them to tell if ballots are being "lost" or changed.Why? What's wrong with pen and paper?
Counting and validating paper ballots is simple. As is protecting them. They are PHYSICAL objects. People have lots of experience in keeping physical objects secure.
Which is why we have "OCD" and NOT "obsessive door checking disorder".
Being that the door checking is an manifestation of OCD, not a disorder in and of itself. If you removed the door, the OCD will still be there. It will just transfer itself to something else. Such as checking the stove to make sure it is off.
Okay, so excessive emailing is a problem.
But I'm the email admin for the company I work at. At what point do I qualify as "addicted" so I can get disability?
Do real junkies ever get tired of heroin? Or annoyed at stupid people for giving them more heroin?
And for any other anti-virus vendor who cares to implement it.
#1. A bootable CD that can give you read/write access to the local hard drive.
#2. A database (that can be updated) of what the MOST COMMON files are in which directories OF THE OS and their various identifying characteristics.
Because it is far, Far, FAR easier to validate that a certain file is "good" than to determine that it is "bad".
Simple concept, no?
Anything that cannot be identified can be "quarantined" if the user so wishes. Any data files SHOULD be easily identified.
Another benefit of this approach would be to identify files left over from incomplete un-installs.
Hey, if the various 3rd parties WANT to, they could even offer to run the un-install routine for the apps they've identified. Or to clean-up known crap.
Because the people who can "see" the domains you research have access that YOU do not have.
If they were randomly guessing domains and "tasting" them, who would care?
It's when they have info that you do not have that this becomes a problem.
The problem is that no matter how well YOU protect yourself, other agencies have your personal information in their databases.
What happens if your employer loses a laptop with your SSN, name, etc on it?
Eventually, the criminals are just going to start building a database with whatever information they can find.
Then they'll use that database to take out a second mortgage on your home, purchase a new car and open a few credit cards under your name.
You'll lose more money than you have. And you'll never have a chance to prevent it. Because all the information will be "leaked" from 3rd parties.
I'm pointing out how you are attempting to abuse the English language because you don't have a defensible position.
You said:
I showed that one person, by your definition, was a "mob".
So, to summarize so far:
#1. Consensual acts between adults are okay.
#2. #1 becomes not okay when brainwashing is involved or when one person is restricted from leaving.
#3. People do have a right to protest such behaviour.
#4. Their protests are not "vigilante justice".
#5. And one person protesting is not a "mob".
You have quite the track record of incorrect statements going there.
Really? So a single person is a "mob" if that person protests?
Fascinating.
Illogical, irrational and incorrect, but still fascinating.
And yes, they do have a legal right to protest.
So, to summarize:
#1. Consensual acts between adults are okay.
#2. #1 becomes not okay when brainwashing is involved or when one person is restricted from leaving.
#3. People do have a right to protest such behaviour.
#4. Their protests are not "vigilante justice".
To me, "vigilante justice" means "hanging".
I'm not seeing that. I'm seeing people exercising their LEGAL right to protest.
You can claim it is "hate", but that's just your claim.
Do the research and see the instances of abuse by Scientologists. Including brainwashing.