Bitter much? You certainly did unload a pile of rubbish there, feel any better? Linear sequential thinkers? Patterns in seemingly random information? Over 30 too old? Total horseshit, you don't know what you're talking about.
Swearing makes you look immature.
You may think you are some kind of genius, but in reality you are just an anti-social nerd with a superiority complex.
Actually, I am some kind of genius, as proven by neuropsych testing. My lowest IQ score was 136. It can't be capped, however, because I have severe ADHD which (if you look it up) makes finding the ceiling difficult. I have tested a higher in the past. As to the rest, that's subjective, but as part of my evil overlord training I can assure you that I have been evaluated by a competent psychologist and been treated for any conditions or unusual phobias which could be potentially harmful.
Discipline and authority are not anathema to hacking or technical ability.
I think you meant to say 'respecting authority', and that's only true to a point: People with high general intelligence and hacking/technical ability tend to not respect authority simply because of title or position. Respect is earned in this field, not given.
You haven't been paying close enough to their despiration (and attrition).
It's 'desperation', and they revised their enlistment requirements in August 2009. The enlistment age for the Air Force is 27 now. Did you read the rest of this thread before posting that?
The same way they recruit very bright people for other specialized fields - they recruit the people who aren't anti-authoritarian, or who are anti-authoritarian but can submerge that enough to get along and do their jobs properly. (The Submarine Service and the various special forces are well stocked with the latter.) It may not appeal to stereotypical 'average Slashdotter', but then that is a fairly small demographic even within the IT world.
Most people in IT aren't anti-authoritarian just to be an ass -- they are because they have a low tolerance for people who try to order them around that they have no respect for or feel are less capable of doing the job than they are. That's readily cured with training -- but that's an up-front cost that I don't think the military is willing to absorb because skimming off the top is cheaper. They haven't had to dig into the labor pool. Maybe they don't need to, I don't know -- but the whole point of basic is to change attitudes, which is all that is. It's an artificial barrier.
In reality, the military knows very well how to handle a wide variety of personality types. Half the guys on my crew (including me) would have been in the brig had we been in the surface Navy rather than the Submarine Force.
You've just stated a logical contradiction: You can't say the military as a whole can handle a wide variety of personality types, and in the next breath state you'd be thrown in the brig if you were in a different branch of service. You're comparing apples and oranges -- I made a general statement that holds true for the general case. You are making a specific statement that is true in that one instance. Both can be logically true.
First off, this is 2010 not 1910. There's been women in the service for decades now.
Care to point me in the direction of any women who have managed to make General, in any branch of service? Last I checked, there were none. So women may be in the military, but they either lack the same potential as men -- or environmental factors are holding them back. Which one do you suppose it is?
And given the number of chiefs and senior offices I knew and know that are over thirty... Well, like the rest of your stereotypes, you're simply wrong.
I was referring to recruitment, and I am not wrong. The age requirements for the air force is age 27. If you're older than that, you cannot enlist unless you've had prior service.
Not only that, but I've been in MD for a year now and every day I see job postings for "Linux Sys Admin with active full scope poly clearances" and I keep wondering where the hell they expect to find them. I mean it's one thing to find a good Linux sys admin but finding one with an active clearance? If you do find one you'd just be stealing them from some other agency/contractor.
A lot of hackers and creative types are scared to death of the government, and live unconventional lifestyles that the government finds threatening. For example, playing LARP, or liking the original Star Trek (TNG is apparently okay) is a mark against you for some security clearances. And because very smart people do their homework -- they find these things out and it disillusions them.
If the NSA wants better numbers, they need to shed their preconceptions. But then, that's exactly the kind of thinking that's been lacking in american intelligence services for about the past sixty years: We've been on a downward trend of skepticism and preconceptions being held so long they become accepted wisdom without testing and re-evaluating ever since the late 1950s. Once a "negative attribute" gets added to the list of things to watch for, it never comes off "out of an abundance of caution" -- and a reckless lack of common sense!
And it doesn't seem very rational. All of the in/famous hackers I can think of are at least men, and most are Caucasian. DVD John, Kevin Mitnic, Stroustrup, Paul Lutus, Linus Torvalds, Woz, Stall Man, Wall, Knuth, Shimomura, Johnathan James, and Adrian Lamo... And I don't think any of them are homosexual.. Do you have any counter-examples that would alter this perception?
It's a mark of arrogance that just because you don't see them doesn't mean they don't exist. Esther Dyson, Sally Floyd (TCP/IP), Susan Kare, Jeri Ellsworth (C64), Mary Lou Jepsen (CTO of OLPC), Radia Perlman (invented the Spanning Tree Protocol)... and the list goes on.
We aren't visible because this is a male-dominated field -- that doesn't mean the same potentialities don't exist in women, recurring generation after generation, only to perish because society can't find a way to support women in science and technology. Some brave souls do so in spite of the obstacles -- and if they don't make headlines as often, that's no proof against their abilities, but rather social commentary on existing prejudices.
I walked into the Navy recruiter about a year ago, and asked him what I could in the Navy with a degrees in computer sciences and statistics. I am also physically-fit and have a high GPA.
It begs the question of what you're doing on slashdot then, but I digress...
The officer (not enlisted) basically told me "not a goddamn thing, try the Army".
Not to say your experience was wrong, but it's entirely possible the guy was just a dick and you should speak to a different recuirter. They aren't carbon-copies of each other.
I disagree with what you said about gays and women in the military; recent statistics suggest that 33% percent of female veterans have been raped, and 70% experienced some form of sexual harassment.
And that has what. exactly. to do with their ability to do the job? That is a discipline problem, best solved by walking them down a long row of prison cells, and then having the guard loudly say "So you're the rapist, eh?" and then taking a long break.
As for gays being "more creative", that is a stereotype.
Yes, yes it is. And stereotypes also usually contain at least a grain of truth. Let me help your argument out a bit: You'd be better off arguing the null hypothesis, because there isn't strong evidence one way or the other. I just like throwing that in there because I'm rather pissy about not having been able to apply (I tried). Hey, at least I'm honest! But it's a moot point; the truth is we can't afford to judge people on anything but their ability to do the job -- we're greatly outnumbered. I just hope that when this is realized, the 3-7% of the population they're excluding will be considered. And just to make sure they register my opinion on the matter.... president, bomb, praise allah, airplane, umm... double top secret echelon network of fabulously packet sniffed intelligence!!! (xoxoxo Agent Smith!)
The best hackers are human compilers (i.e. understand how C code may be exploited), and have encyclopedic knowledge of security.
The best hackers often have interests outside of computers for which they are more than merely competent. Hackers, and I mean the old school kind, seem to absorb knowledge like a sponge. They aren't necessary intelligent (though it helps). It's this soaking up of large amounts of information coupled with a creative impulse that defines the hacker mindset. In fact... you don't have to even know what C is to be a hacker. It's a mindset, not a skillset.
to be populated by mirror computers and inhabited by myriad software sim-people 'replicants,' and used as a firing range in which to develop the art of cyber warfare.")
Oh, yeah, I remember these guys. We invited the general to come and post on slashdot a few years back. They never did come up with a good answer to how they can recruit the necessary talent when the aforementioned is generally anti-authoritarian. Hacking, or "cyberwarfare", or whatever you want to call it, all requires a high degree of creativity combined with the ability to see patterns in seemingly random information. Both of these skillsets are a rarity in the general population -- most people are linear sequential thinkers, which means they can't start one task without stopping another. Everything about this theatre is contrary to conventional military discipline.
This is an organization that still believes that only men should be in their little club, gays are bad, and if you're over 30 you're too old. Maybe that works well when you're comparing gun sizes, but in this theatre the groups they're excluding have exactly the human resources such an operation needs: Women are generally able to multitask and see the "big picture" easier than men, gays stereotypically gravitate towards creative endeavors (theatre, graphic design, etc.), and the over 30 crowd has exactly the kind of in-depth understanding of the technology and experience necessary to use it that a bunch of twenty-somethings just can't match, no matter how good the training.
They're putting themselves at a huge handicap -- and they can't afford to do that. Especially when China has more honor students than we have students in whole. They can afford to be prejudiced. They can afford to throw a million people over a cliff to fund public works projects. Meanwhile, our antiquidated notions of what a soldier is puts us at a substantial risk of being obliterated in the global theatre.
Sad. Where's an angry four star general when you need one?
The problem is each technology is developed without consideration for large numbers of concurrent devices using the same spectrum. Between encryption, poor handshaking, EMI from non-compliant devices, and attempts by manufacturers to overpower their devices with turbo this or ultra that, the end result is that in high device density areas, the technology becomes nearly useless. This is actually the FCC's fault -- they haven't allocated a large chunk of bandwidth exclusively for consumer-based hardware that provided packet-based network services that requires licensing and certification to use. The 2.4GHz band is like CB Radio -- sure, it's illegal to use a 500 watt transmitter on your mobile rig, but since everybody else and their dog uses it, you should too.
Manufacturers need to come up with protocols that allow the use of strong encryption AND still allow traffic management and QoS. In other words, stop setting up a bazillion different networks: There is one network per channel. Encryption is enabled by default, and that key determines whether which packets can be decrypted. That way, all the header information and link-level stuff that's essential for management is still available, but a reasonable level of privacy is still possible.
Roses are red, genes are blue, their mistakes are small, and very rare, as long as you discount, Dupple's hair. *cough* Anyway, I don't care what's in your genes as long as you stay out of mine.:P
For what it's worth, your post should be modded interesting at the very least, if only to annoy that AC stalker you seem to have acquired.
I'll depart from my busy schedule of lesbianism and witchcraft to field this one.;)
He's part of a growing fan club of emotionally under-developed males unaccustomed to having girls in their internet man cave, let alone a gay one. The community outwardly states they aren't sexist. They're smart, well-educated, (generally) white men, and so overt displays of sexism are met with open contempt. This is why they moderate most of the posts by "the fan club" down. But then they moderate my posts down because I attract them. They think it's at least partly my fault because my presence provokes them. And in that little microcosm of human behavior, is the reason sexism, racism, homophobia, and most human prejudice is allowed to endure.
I'm surprised you're still posting after that racist tirade about Haiti you posted.
That word, I do not think it means what you think it means. Saying that humanity as a whole is filled with dumb, irrational, self-centered individuals isn't racist.
Really, you're disgusting, and I intend to make sure you're outed as a racist every time I see you.
Well, if you're going to "out" me, could you at least do me (and everyone else) a favor and link to a post that actually contains a racist comment?
I think I understand, but I also think a car analogy is in order.
Fine. *mutter, mutter* Your car is just a metaphor for a folding protein called a prion. Except your car isn't a car, but a robot. We'll call it a transformer. Now there are good transformers, and Decepti--I mean, bad robots. The bad robots are bad because they just don't know when to stop. And they want to take over everything using a device called the AllSpark. The AllSpark is the source of ultimate power for the robots good and bad. Except the AllSpark is really nucleic acid. The only way to beat the Deceptic--I mean, bad prions, is to destroy the AllSp--er, nucleic acid. But that would be bad, because without the nucleic acid, none of the cars would run, nobody would get anywhere, and then anarchy would result and the world would end.
The problem with prions, as I understand it, is that they can't be targeted by the autoimmune system because they can't be bonded to; And that is because of the blood-brain barrier. Normal prions are folded proteins that self-terminate. That is, they end after a certain number of repeats. But abnormal ones don't ever stop growing -- and they occasionally break apart, but they keep folding forever. It's like trash that never biodegrades, in your body, clogging up the space between nerve endings until nothing gets through. That's not a technically accurate description, but it's a good way to view the problem.
I think you got enough capital letters in there, but can you add more exclamation points to your post please? My doctor says if I don't get enough each day I may start to believe what people say on the internet, and then I have to get a referral to a psychiatrist. Also, begging to differ with you -- but money does grow on trees if you make your standard currency the leaf. Our great, great ancestors used that currency for a short time. But then a crazy man chasing a chesterfield sofa across prehistoric fields appeared and caused some consternation. The Leaf fell from popularity shortly afterwards. I think his name was Arthur...
If this rubs SF.net the wrong way so much, why do they continue to operate in the US?
Because the US is where most of the internet infrastructure sits, and most of the traffic is. It's cheap to locate your servers here -- and more expensive to decentralize or put them elsewhere. It's not political -- it's technical.
The thing is, the companies that provide that insurance want to make a profit. That means that they charge less to those companies that takes steps to minimize their risk. That means that it costs the company to be vulnerable, even if nobody hacks their system. SO, if a company does not mitigate its risk of a data breach and its competitor does, it is at a competitive disadvantage.
That's an oversimplification. Most insurance companies release guidelines that you have to comply with to get certain rates. For example, your auto insurance may be lower because you have a car alarm on it. That doesn't mean the car alarm works, or was from a reputable vendor, just that something on that car now meets the definition of "car alarm". Lots of checklists like this exist in the business world -- they add the appearance of security, but do nothing to actually create security. For example, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act contains lots of rules. One company I worked for decided to encrypt every desktop harddrive to meet one of the requirements of preventing data theft. Of course, that didn't prevent the nightly dumps of the pharmacy's customer records from being put in a world-readable/writable, anonymously, and remotely accessible share for a few hours at a go -- because that's how the backup program worked. You just had to know when and where to connect on the network. Did I mention this company's entire corporate intranet was accessible from kiosks and each store has wifi?
Checklists don't improve security, they just give legal a way to say "we made a good faith effort." I stand by my original assertion -- Insurance is just a cost-shifting tactic that allows bad business practices to manifest because there's no real pressure to use good business practices.
The cost of a data breach increased last year to $204 per compromised customer record...
Insurance covers most companies. Because of this, it has gone from being a threat that must be addressed to a cost of doing business. The only thing a business is concerned about is revealing the breach to the public because it could harm its reputation. Everything else can be mopped up in the insurance and legal departments. The costs of a data breach are thus passed on in aggregate to not just the company's customers, but to every business that purchases insurance from that insurance vendor. And given the lack of diversity in the insurance market (ie, most of the market is controlled by only a few businesses) -- more than likely, that's a lot of businesses.
And that's how businesses manage risk -- and pass the costs on to you. And the problem will therefore never go away, because it's been put inside an SEP Field (Somebody Else's Problem), the most powerful repulsive force in the universe.
Slashdot Mirror
Bitter much? You certainly did unload a pile of rubbish there, feel any better? Linear sequential thinkers? Patterns in seemingly random information? Over 30 too old? Total horseshit, you don't know what you're talking about.
Swearing makes you look immature.
You may think you are some kind of genius, but in reality you are just an anti-social nerd with a superiority complex.
Actually, I am some kind of genius, as proven by neuropsych testing. My lowest IQ score was 136. It can't be capped, however, because I have severe ADHD which (if you look it up) makes finding the ceiling difficult. I have tested a higher in the past. As to the rest, that's subjective, but as part of my evil overlord training I can assure you that I have been evaluated by a competent psychologist and been treated for any conditions or unusual phobias which could be potentially harmful.
Discipline and authority are not anathema to hacking or technical ability.
I think you meant to say 'respecting authority', and that's only true to a point: People with high general intelligence and hacking/technical ability tend to not respect authority simply because of title or position. Respect is earned in this field, not given.
You haven't been paying close enough to their despiration (and attrition).
It's 'desperation', and they revised their enlistment requirements in August 2009. The enlistment age for the Air Force is 27 now. Did you read the rest of this thread before posting that?
You can join the US Army at 42 without a waiver.. so 30 is not too old.
This branch is run by the Air Force, where the limit is 27.
The same way they recruit very bright people for other specialized fields - they recruit the people who aren't anti-authoritarian, or who are anti-authoritarian but can submerge that enough to get along and do their jobs properly. (The Submarine Service and the various special forces are well stocked with the latter.) It may not appeal to stereotypical 'average Slashdotter', but then that is a fairly small demographic even within the IT world.
Most people in IT aren't anti-authoritarian just to be an ass -- they are because they have a low tolerance for people who try to order them around that they have no respect for or feel are less capable of doing the job than they are. That's readily cured with training -- but that's an up-front cost that I don't think the military is willing to absorb because skimming off the top is cheaper. They haven't had to dig into the labor pool. Maybe they don't need to, I don't know -- but the whole point of basic is to change attitudes, which is all that is. It's an artificial barrier.
In reality, the military knows very well how to handle a wide variety of personality types. Half the guys on my crew (including me) would have been in the brig had we been in the surface Navy rather than the Submarine Force.
You've just stated a logical contradiction: You can't say the military as a whole can handle a wide variety of personality types, and in the next breath state you'd be thrown in the brig if you were in a different branch of service. You're comparing apples and oranges -- I made a general statement that holds true for the general case. You are making a specific statement that is true in that one instance. Both can be logically true.
First off, this is 2010 not 1910. There's been women in the service for decades now.
Care to point me in the direction of any women who have managed to make General, in any branch of service? Last I checked, there were none. So women may be in the military, but they either lack the same potential as men -- or environmental factors are holding them back. Which one do you suppose it is?
And given the number of chiefs and senior offices I knew and know that are over thirty... Well, like the rest of your stereotypes, you're simply wrong.
I was referring to recruitment, and I am not wrong. The age requirements for the air force is age 27. If you're older than that, you cannot enlist unless you've had prior service.
Not only that, but I've been in MD for a year now and every day I see job postings for "Linux Sys Admin with active full scope poly clearances" and I keep wondering where the hell they expect to find them. I mean it's one thing to find a good Linux sys admin but finding one with an active clearance? If you do find one you'd just be stealing them from some other agency/contractor.
A lot of hackers and creative types are scared to death of the government, and live unconventional lifestyles that the government finds threatening. For example, playing LARP, or liking the original Star Trek (TNG is apparently okay) is a mark against you for some security clearances. And because very smart people do their homework -- they find these things out and it disillusions them.
If the NSA wants better numbers, they need to shed their preconceptions. But then, that's exactly the kind of thinking that's been lacking in american intelligence services for about the past sixty years: We've been on a downward trend of skepticism and preconceptions being held so long they become accepted wisdom without testing and re-evaluating ever since the late 1950s. Once a "negative attribute" gets added to the list of things to watch for, it never comes off "out of an abundance of caution" -- and a reckless lack of common sense!
And it doesn't seem very rational. All of the in/famous hackers I can think of are at least men, and most are Caucasian. DVD John, Kevin Mitnic, Stroustrup, Paul Lutus, Linus Torvalds, Woz, Stall Man, Wall, Knuth, Shimomura, Johnathan James, and Adrian Lamo... And I don't think any of them are homosexual.. Do you have any counter-examples that would alter this perception?
It's a mark of arrogance that just because you don't see them doesn't mean they don't exist. Esther Dyson, Sally Floyd (TCP/IP), Susan Kare, Jeri Ellsworth (C64), Mary Lou Jepsen (CTO of OLPC), Radia Perlman (invented the Spanning Tree Protocol)... and the list goes on.
We aren't visible because this is a male-dominated field -- that doesn't mean the same potentialities don't exist in women, recurring generation after generation, only to perish because society can't find a way to support women in science and technology. Some brave souls do so in spite of the obstacles -- and if they don't make headlines as often, that's no proof against their abilities, but rather social commentary on existing prejudices.
I walked into the Navy recruiter about a year ago, and asked him what I could in the Navy with a degrees in computer sciences and statistics. I am also physically-fit and have a high GPA.
It begs the question of what you're doing on slashdot then, but I digress...
The officer (not enlisted) basically told me "not a goddamn thing, try the Army".
Not to say your experience was wrong, but it's entirely possible the guy was just a dick and you should speak to a different recuirter. They aren't carbon-copies of each other.
I disagree with what you said about gays and women in the military; recent statistics suggest that 33% percent of female veterans have been raped, and 70% experienced some form of sexual harassment.
And that has what. exactly. to do with their ability to do the job? That is a discipline problem, best solved by walking them down a long row of prison cells, and then having the guard loudly say "So you're the rapist, eh?" and then taking a long break.
As for gays being "more creative", that is a stereotype.
Yes, yes it is. And stereotypes also usually contain at least a grain of truth. Let me help your argument out a bit: You'd be better off arguing the null hypothesis, because there isn't strong evidence one way or the other. I just like throwing that in there because I'm rather pissy about not having been able to apply (I tried). Hey, at least I'm honest! But it's a moot point; the truth is we can't afford to judge people on anything but their ability to do the job -- we're greatly outnumbered. I just hope that when this is realized, the 3-7% of the population they're excluding will be considered. And just to make sure they register my opinion on the matter.... president, bomb, praise allah, airplane, umm... double top secret echelon network of fabulously packet sniffed intelligence!!! (xoxoxo Agent Smith!)
The best hackers are human compilers (i.e. understand how C code may be exploited), and have encyclopedic knowledge of security.
The best hackers often have interests outside of computers for which they are more than merely competent. Hackers, and I mean the old school kind, seem to absorb knowledge like a sponge. They aren't necessary intelligent (though it helps). It's this soaking up of large amounts of information coupled with a creative impulse that defines the hacker mindset. In fact... you don't have to even know what C is to be a hacker. It's a mindset, not a skillset.
to be populated by mirror computers and inhabited by myriad software sim-people 'replicants,' and used as a firing range in which to develop the art of cyber warfare.")
Oh, yeah, I remember these guys. We invited the general to come and post on slashdot a few years back. They never did come up with a good answer to how they can recruit the necessary talent when the aforementioned is generally anti-authoritarian. Hacking, or "cyberwarfare", or whatever you want to call it, all requires a high degree of creativity combined with the ability to see patterns in seemingly random information. Both of these skillsets are a rarity in the general population -- most people are linear sequential thinkers, which means they can't start one task without stopping another. Everything about this theatre is contrary to conventional military discipline.
This is an organization that still believes that only men should be in their little club, gays are bad, and if you're over 30 you're too old. Maybe that works well when you're comparing gun sizes, but in this theatre the groups they're excluding have exactly the human resources such an operation needs: Women are generally able to multitask and see the "big picture" easier than men, gays stereotypically gravitate towards creative endeavors (theatre, graphic design, etc.), and the over 30 crowd has exactly the kind of in-depth understanding of the technology and experience necessary to use it that a bunch of twenty-somethings just can't match, no matter how good the training.
They're putting themselves at a huge handicap -- and they can't afford to do that. Especially when China has more honor students than we have students in whole. They can afford to be prejudiced. They can afford to throw a million people over a cliff to fund public works projects. Meanwhile, our antiquidated notions of what a soldier is puts us at a substantial risk of being obliterated in the global theatre.
Sad. Where's an angry four star general when you need one?
The problem is each technology is developed without consideration for large numbers of concurrent devices using the same spectrum. Between encryption, poor handshaking, EMI from non-compliant devices, and attempts by manufacturers to overpower their devices with turbo this or ultra that, the end result is that in high device density areas, the technology becomes nearly useless. This is actually the FCC's fault -- they haven't allocated a large chunk of bandwidth exclusively for consumer-based hardware that provided packet-based network services that requires licensing and certification to use. The 2.4GHz band is like CB Radio -- sure, it's illegal to use a 500 watt transmitter on your mobile rig, but since everybody else and their dog uses it, you should too.
Manufacturers need to come up with protocols that allow the use of strong encryption AND still allow traffic management and QoS. In other words, stop setting up a bazillion different networks: There is one network per channel. Encryption is enabled by default, and that key determines whether which packets can be decrypted. That way, all the header information and link-level stuff that's essential for management is still available, but a reasonable level of privacy is still possible.
i know we're not to rtfa, but you're off by ~100w for both phenom ii processors in the review which are 80w and 95w.
You're quoting TDP, I quoted max output. I rtfa, I just don't consider TDP a valid metric, because 'typical load' is subjective.
For $100 or less, bang for the buck with AMD is still relatively high
The Phenom II draws 187 watts under full load, so yeah -- a pretty big bang actually, if you aren't careful. You get less "bang" with a E6300.
"I drank WHAT?" : Socrates
Actually, he mentioned his cock. ;)
I pass on my genes horizontally
Roses are red, genes are blue, :P
their mistakes are small, and very rare,
as long as you discount, Dupple's hair.
*cough*
Anyway, I don't care what's in your genes as long as you stay out of mine.
I think I love you in a platonic sort of way.
Well, as long as it stays platonic I won't send you the way of Socrates.
I'm not really sure how raising the price of printer ink is going to screw the striking HP workers.
They don't have to screw the workers -- they can screw us instead. Or split the difference and screw both.
For what it's worth, your post should be modded interesting at the very least, if only to annoy that AC stalker you seem to have acquired.
I'll depart from my busy schedule of lesbianism and witchcraft to field this one. ;)
He's part of a growing fan club of emotionally under-developed males unaccustomed to having girls in their internet man cave, let alone a gay one. The community outwardly states they aren't sexist. They're smart, well-educated, (generally) white men, and so overt displays of sexism are met with open contempt. This is why they moderate most of the posts by "the fan club" down. But then they moderate my posts down because I attract them. They think it's at least partly my fault because my presence provokes them. And in that little microcosm of human behavior, is the reason sexism, racism, homophobia, and most human prejudice is allowed to endure.
Thank you for being awesome, khayman80. ^_^
...no doubt management will try and screw them further to pay for this debacle."
Yeah. Printer ink will now start costing $7,000 a gallon instead of the paltry $6,400 it does now.
I'm surprised you're still posting after that racist tirade about Haiti you posted.
That word, I do not think it means what you think it means. Saying that humanity as a whole is filled with dumb, irrational, self-centered individuals isn't racist.
Really, you're disgusting, and I intend to make sure you're outed as a racist every time I see you.
Well, if you're going to "out" me, could you at least do me (and everyone else) a favor and link to a post that actually contains a racist comment?
Thanks, timmarhy. ;)
I think I understand, but I also think a car analogy is in order.
Fine. *mutter, mutter* Your car is just a metaphor for a folding protein called a prion. Except your car isn't a car, but a robot. We'll call it a transformer. Now there are good transformers, and Decepti--I mean, bad robots. The bad robots are bad because they just don't know when to stop. And they want to take over everything using a device called the AllSpark. The AllSpark is the source of ultimate power for the robots good and bad. Except the AllSpark is really nucleic acid. The only way to beat the Deceptic--I mean, bad prions, is to destroy the AllSp--er, nucleic acid. But that would be bad, because without the nucleic acid, none of the cars would run, nobody would get anywhere, and then anarchy would result and the world would end.
The problem with prions, as I understand it, is that they can't be targeted by the autoimmune system because they can't be bonded to; And that is because of the blood-brain barrier. Normal prions are folded proteins that self-terminate. That is, they end after a certain number of repeats. But abnormal ones don't ever stop growing -- and they occasionally break apart, but they keep folding forever. It's like trash that never biodegrades, in your body, clogging up the space between nerve endings until nothing gets through. That's not a technically accurate description, but it's a good way to view the problem.
I think you got enough capital letters in there, but can you add more exclamation points to your post please? My doctor says if I don't get enough each day I may start to believe what people say on the internet, and then I have to get a referral to a psychiatrist. Also, begging to differ with you -- but money does grow on trees if you make your standard currency the leaf. Our great, great ancestors used that currency for a short time. But then a crazy man chasing a chesterfield sofa across prehistoric fields appeared and caused some consternation. The Leaf fell from popularity shortly afterwards. I think his name was Arthur...
If this rubs SF.net the wrong way so much, why do they continue to operate in the US?
Because the US is where most of the internet infrastructure sits, and most of the traffic is. It's cheap to locate your servers here -- and more expensive to decentralize or put them elsewhere. It's not political -- it's technical.
The thing is, the companies that provide that insurance want to make a profit. That means that they charge less to those companies that takes steps to minimize their risk. That means that it costs the company to be vulnerable, even if nobody hacks their system. SO, if a company does not mitigate its risk of a data breach and its competitor does, it is at a competitive disadvantage.
That's an oversimplification. Most insurance companies release guidelines that you have to comply with to get certain rates. For example, your auto insurance may be lower because you have a car alarm on it. That doesn't mean the car alarm works, or was from a reputable vendor, just that something on that car now meets the definition of "car alarm". Lots of checklists like this exist in the business world -- they add the appearance of security, but do nothing to actually create security. For example, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act contains lots of rules. One company I worked for decided to encrypt every desktop harddrive to meet one of the requirements of preventing data theft. Of course, that didn't prevent the nightly dumps of the pharmacy's customer records from being put in a world-readable/writable, anonymously, and remotely accessible share for a few hours at a go -- because that's how the backup program worked. You just had to know when and where to connect on the network. Did I mention this company's entire corporate intranet was accessible from kiosks and each store has wifi?
Checklists don't improve security, they just give legal a way to say "we made a good faith effort." I stand by my original assertion -- Insurance is just a cost-shifting tactic that allows bad business practices to manifest because there's no real pressure to use good business practices.
The cost of a data breach increased last year to $204 per compromised customer record...
Insurance covers most companies. Because of this, it has gone from being a threat that must be addressed to a cost of doing business. The only thing a business is concerned about is revealing the breach to the public because it could harm its reputation. Everything else can be mopped up in the insurance and legal departments. The costs of a data breach are thus passed on in aggregate to not just the company's customers, but to every business that purchases insurance from that insurance vendor. And given the lack of diversity in the insurance market (ie, most of the market is controlled by only a few businesses) -- more than likely, that's a lot of businesses.
And that's how businesses manage risk -- and pass the costs on to you. And the problem will therefore never go away, because it's been put inside an SEP Field (Somebody Else's Problem), the most powerful repulsive force in the universe.