Or perhaps more kindly: even if the data are completely accurate, they're averages that don't necessarily apply to every, or even any, particular case. I can't make a decision about something like this on the basis of what the mean or median cost/benefit would be, but only of what (as best I can estimate them) my own are.
Actually the law is still up in the air on this in the US. Judges have, in the past, held that a defendant was not obligated to reveal a password. There is no "law" about this, it's mainly interpretation of the 5th Amendment.
This. You are likely not too save much money if you like sports in general, and get all the sports channels, or movies in general, and get all the movie channels. But if you are croquet (and no other sports) and documentaries (and no other movies), and get the Croquet Network and the Documentary Channel, and nothing else, you might come out ahead.
You're thinking about this bass-ackwards. For a stable corporate release, use the ESR of Firefox. Don't try blocking things in DNS--for two reasons. First, there are now lots of mobile machines likely to be on the corporate networks (personal laptops, tablets, smartphones), and there's no reason to block them. Second, lots of corporate machines are notebooks, so they are going to be online outside of the LAN, and will autoupdate there. So better to go with a different release path than to try to do this at the firewall.
Sure, the damage is done, but at least you know who did it. For a firm dealing with medical, financial, or other sensitive data, that's kind of important.
Actually I doubt you'd have a case against Cisco or even the company; it would be the employee who knowingly initiated a connection that could be snooped on who would be at fault, if anyone.
No, they're not quite the same thing. But in the case of ring species, by normal standards A and B would be the same species and B and C would be the same species but A and C would not.
People who don't have one. In many parts of the world, people can't afford personal computers, and only have access to them at work, at internet cafes, etc.
Exactly. If someone came up with a business plan to sell hearing aids of comparable quality at half the price, the insurance companies would push customers to use that vendor. Those insurers who did so could offer lower premiums and thereby attract more customers (or keep their current ones). The fact that this hasn't happened suggests that it's not so easy to sell hearing aids for less, contrary to what many commenters are saying.
Everywhere. Not telescope-quality, but historical records do mention unusual sunspot activity and the like. Something this big would have been noted, had it been visible.
I sort of do. I rely on Outlook's holidays to know, for example, whether to expect banks and government offices to be open or when my trash should be put out a day later than usual. My employer (a university) provides an.ics calendar of its schedule--it follows some official holidays but not others. So I need to be aware of both, and generally assume that Outlook's holidays are reliable (though an unusual change like this would likely have been well-publicized).
Sadly all very large planes are inherently unsafe.
So are trains and cars (not to mention small planes, which are, mile for mile flown, much more dangerous than big planes). Everything has points of failure and is therefore unsafe in some way; the question can only be "how unsafe?"
That's incredibly dumb. Why would you require, say, a highly-skilled programmer to spend X hours a week moving boxes? As an employer, you would be paying a huge premium for a probably incompetent laborer (not to mention the risk that he/she would suffer an injury), and there might not be any physical labor to do on the site where he/she works. If you want that employee to be in shape, provide a gym or discounted gym membership. And in cases like your brother's, it would make sense for the airline to provide counseling about diet and exercise for employees who move from physical to sedentary tasks.
But the public still pays a cost, since the ambulance is still going to take you to the hospital and the ER is still going to treat you if you don't wear your seat belt. And you might need to be buried in a pauper's grave. If you can't pay for those expenses, they fall on the whole community.
Slashdot Mirror
The hunted2 becomes the hunter2?
Or perhaps more kindly: even if the data are completely accurate, they're averages that don't necessarily apply to every, or even any, particular case. I can't make a decision about something like this on the basis of what the mean or median cost/benefit would be, but only of what (as best I can estimate them) my own are.
Actually the law is still up in the air on this in the US. Judges have, in the past, held that a defendant was not obligated to reveal a password. There is no "law" about this, it's mainly interpretation of the 5th Amendment.
This. You are likely not too save much money if you like sports in general, and get all the sports channels, or movies in general, and get all the movie channels. But if you are croquet (and no other sports) and documentaries (and no other movies), and get the Croquet Network and the Documentary Channel, and nothing else, you might come out ahead.
Then you are probably part of a large and successful clan of Saudi industrialists of Yemeni origin.
You're thinking about this bass-ackwards. For a stable corporate release, use the ESR of Firefox. Don't try blocking things in DNS--for two reasons. First, there are now lots of mobile machines likely to be on the corporate networks (personal laptops, tablets, smartphones), and there's no reason to block them. Second, lots of corporate machines are notebooks, so they are going to be online outside of the LAN, and will autoupdate there. So better to go with a different release path than to try to do this at the firewall.
Sure, the damage is done, but at least you know who did it. For a firm dealing with medical, financial, or other sensitive data, that's kind of important.
Actually I doubt you'd have a case against Cisco or even the company; it would be the employee who knowingly initiated a connection that could be snooped on who would be at fault, if anyone.
In security, you have to start with the assumption that everyone is untrustworthy until proven otherwise.
No, they're not quite the same thing. But in the case of ring species, by normal standards A and B would be the same species and B and C would be the same species but A and C would not.
For some people, yes.
Actually, no. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_species
People who don't have one. In many parts of the world, people can't afford personal computers, and only have access to them at work, at internet cafes, etc.
What about users at the office or at a public computer (e.g., library) who have no control over the browser they're using?
Actually, there used to be an IE for Mac.
That's what hearing aids were like back in the1950s... http://www.hearingaidmuseum.com/gallery/Transistor%20(Body)/Sonotone/info/sonotone1010.htm
Exactly. If someone came up with a business plan to sell hearing aids of comparable quality at half the price, the insurance companies would push customers to use that vendor. Those insurers who did so could offer lower premiums and thereby attract more customers (or keep their current ones). The fact that this hasn't happened suggests that it's not so easy to sell hearing aids for less, contrary to what many commenters are saying.
Chicken-and-egg: if such monitors were cheap and widespread, OS makers would quickly adjust.
Everywhere. Not telescope-quality, but historical records do mention unusual sunspot activity and the like. Something this big would have been noted, had it been visible.
I sort of do. I rely on Outlook's holidays to know, for example, whether to expect banks and government offices to be open or when my trash should be put out a day later than usual. My employer (a university) provides an .ics calendar of its schedule--it follows some official holidays but not others. So I need to be aware of both, and generally assume that Outlook's holidays are reliable (though an unusual change like this would likely have been well-publicized).
And will let other countries build military hardware with them?
...will Brits have to retrunk them?
Sadly all very large planes are inherently unsafe.
So are trains and cars (not to mention small planes, which are, mile for mile flown, much more dangerous than big planes). Everything has points of failure and is therefore unsafe in some way; the question can only be "how unsafe?"
That's incredibly dumb. Why would you require, say, a highly-skilled programmer to spend X hours a week moving boxes? As an employer, you would be paying a huge premium for a probably incompetent laborer (not to mention the risk that he/she would suffer an injury), and there might not be any physical labor to do on the site where he/she works. If you want that employee to be in shape, provide a gym or discounted gym membership. And in cases like your brother's, it would make sense for the airline to provide counseling about diet and exercise for employees who move from physical to sedentary tasks.
But the public still pays a cost, since the ambulance is still going to take you to the hospital and the ER is still going to treat you if you don't wear your seat belt. And you might need to be buried in a pauper's grave. If you can't pay for those expenses, they fall on the whole community.