No nothing new at all, BUT did you watch his film? His point isn't that it's occurring but that the majority of people (and I understand the irony) don't know it's not real. Photojournalists and reporters get fired and blacklisted for creating news, so why isn't it happening here? They get paid by the piece and these are clearly faked.
TWO YEARS AGO British police were warned by Scotland Yard that taking pictures is not illegal and shouldn't be construed as a suspicious activity in and of itself.
"Unless there is a very good reason, people taking photographs should not be stopped," wrote Yates, who is Britain's senior counter-terrorism officer.
The fact is that it was the mall who stopped the man (for flimsy and absurd reasoning) and the cop was simply being a jerk. The mall is getting it's peepee spanked by his Facebook page and will pay through economic damage caused by their stupid actions. And (I can't believe I'm saying this) it is unfortunate the man can't sue because of it.
I had two clients in the electronic data discovery business and both laughed when I asked about zeroing a drive. According to them, all they do is alter the track pattern and they can pick up the data very easily. They said to physically destroy it with a sledgehammer.
“No, it’s not an X-ray,” she told Abbott. “It is 10,000 times safer than your cell phone and uses the same type of radio waves as a sonogram.” - Sabrina Birge, an airport security officer.
It's actually quite the slap in the face to all the Dell customers who bought storage from them because it was made by EMC. I wonder if Joe Tucci is having a "Come to Jebus" meeting with Michael Dell.
And Dell-NetApp would be very interesting. Kind of like watching a train wreck itself in slow-mo.
The problem I have with the article is that he completely blows his credibility with that one simple statement about it being insecure by the virtue of it being open source. Everything else he's pretty much spot on.
No, but as an advanced user (I design SAN and NAS stuff) it insults me when they try and talk past me. When I buy a piece of electronics I've usually researched it to death and just want the salesman to get the box and ring it up for me; that's all. I've lost count of how many times these bogus "PC experts" have tried to blow smoke up my butt and impress me. Usually all it takes is telling them, "Fine. I'm on my way to Microcenter / Fry's," and they suddenly are able to sell me what I want.
The worst thing you can do to them is walk out, buy someplace else, and TELL THEM.
I was presented with two choices; Public (recommended) and to keep the current settings. I like the way my settings were, so I kept them. I'm looking at the privacy page right now and the ONLY difference that I can see is it wants a password to access the privacy settings. Everything underneath is exactly the same way it was before they made their changes, which BTW are Everyone for adding me & my location with everything else locked down to "Only Friends". If something's changed under there, I can't see it.
Now, it's pretty sneaky of them to call it a change and put up a big screen with just a few choices that are defaulted to Everybody. Still, I don't see where it's irrevocable; surely they learned something from the Beacon fiasco.
We've had a bumper crop this year of acorns, chestnuts, and pecans. Especially pecans because of the drought the insect population that normally eats them is way down.
Slashdot Mirror
No nothing new at all, BUT did you watch his film? His point isn't that it's occurring but that the majority of people (and I understand the irony) don't know it's not real. Photojournalists and reporters get fired and blacklisted for creating news, so why isn't it happening here? They get paid by the piece and these are clearly faked.
TWO YEARS AGO British police were warned by Scotland Yard that taking pictures is not illegal and shouldn't be construed as a suspicious activity in and of itself.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/dec/15/yates-police-terrorism-powers-photography
"Unless there is a very good reason, people taking photographs should not be stopped," wrote Yates, who is Britain's senior counter-terrorism officer.
The fact is that it was the mall who stopped the man (for flimsy and absurd reasoning) and the cop was simply being a jerk. The mall is getting it's peepee spanked by his Facebook page and will pay through economic damage caused by their stupid actions. And (I can't believe I'm saying this) it is unfortunate the man can't sue because of it.
I had two clients in the electronic data discovery business and both laughed when I asked about zeroing a drive. According to them, all they do is alter the track pattern and they can pick up the data very easily. They said to physically destroy it with a sledgehammer.
“No, it’s not an X-ray,” she told Abbott. “It is 10,000 times safer than your cell phone and uses the same type of radio waves as a sonogram.” - Sabrina Birge, an airport security officer.
Since when did sonograms use radio waves?
It's actually quite the slap in the face to all the Dell customers who bought storage from them because it was made by EMC. I wonder if Joe Tucci is having a "Come to Jebus" meeting with Michael Dell.
And Dell-NetApp would be very interesting. Kind of like watching a train wreck itself in slow-mo.
The problem I have with the article is that he completely blows his credibility with that one simple statement about it being insecure by the virtue of it being open source. Everything else he's pretty much spot on.
No, but as an advanced user (I design SAN and NAS stuff) it insults me when they try and talk past me. When I buy a piece of electronics I've usually researched it to death and just want the salesman to get the box and ring it up for me; that's all. I've lost count of how many times these bogus "PC experts" have tried to blow smoke up my butt and impress me. Usually all it takes is telling them, "Fine. I'm on my way to Microcenter / Fry's," and they suddenly are able to sell me what I want.
The worst thing you can do to them is walk out, buy someplace else, and TELL THEM.
I was presented with two choices; Public (recommended) and to keep the current settings. I like the way my settings were, so I kept them. I'm looking at the privacy page right now and the ONLY difference that I can see is it wants a password to access the privacy settings. Everything underneath is exactly the same way it was before they made their changes, which BTW are Everyone for adding me & my location with everything else locked down to "Only Friends". If something's changed under there, I can't see it.
Now, it's pretty sneaky of them to call it a change and put up a big screen with just a few choices that are defaulted to Everybody. Still, I don't see where it's irrevocable; surely they learned something from the Beacon fiasco.
I think it might be as low as 60 days. Even better reason to do it NOW.
We've had a bumper crop this year of acorns, chestnuts, and pecans. Especially pecans because of the drought the insect population that normally eats them is way down.