The reason businesses are against the ACA is because in order to lower the cost for people, it raises the cost for business. That's a big reason so many businesses are against it. The real solution to all this, of course, is a single-payer system.
It's also a negative review on doing business in New York. People are just trying to make some money in the bad economy. Now they have to move over to New Jersey.
Do not use the same browser for LinkedIn as for any web based email. Note that separate windows doesn't count as separate browsers. Unless you know how to start browsers in a truly separate way, you're better off using separate userids in your computer for each web site that might do this (lots of them).
Their client side code is running in the same web browser than the user logged in to that user's web based email with. It's a browser security issue. Once they know the domain in your email address, they know how to watch you for when you login to your email web site. They don't need the password since it is already logged in. They can't get the password used, but they can get the email contact list, and the contents of the email you are currently reading.
... I use to login to LinkedIn. That way THEIR web client code can't get into my web based email (more than one site) using holes in the browser. For each site I have configured, there is a separate virtual HOME directory the browser is using, so things like cookies and browser processes are fully separated. I can log in to LinkedIn with one process and log in to Gmail with another process and there's no information going between. I can even login to 2 or more different Gmail accounts at the same time using this kind of separation (normally one would have to use separate userids or separate machines).
... AND do not login to your email using the same browser you login to LinkedIn with. Unfortunately, most people use the same browser. Sue the browser maker and get the money back that you paid for the insecure browser.
However, if LinkedIn can figure out where you login to to read your email, which is not hard to do, AND if you are logged in to your email when they try to login as you with the same browser, then THEY can get it because it is your browser that is logging in. Wanna see how that works? Login to your email, then press Ctrl+N and make a new browser, and login to your email from the new browser. Hint: it's just a window on the same browser.
I did thinking on the throne today for my current project. Started coding. Hit an incompatibility in the script I'm calling. So back to thinking. Back to the throne.
Any company that tries to collect on using XOR to implement a cursor on a bit graphic screen with text is a troll, even if they filed the original patent. This is an example of non-innovation.
The problem is that too many of the patents are not innovative. Anyone can make a widget bolt. That patent should have never been issued.
NRA did not stray off... it was pulled off track by the "ban all guns" lobby. The problem today is even well intentioned changes like "background checks for mental illness everywhere" risks the slippery slope, and the "pro guns" lobby has to fight even that to be sure "ban all guns" isn't where we end up. To fix this, liberals need to show, by their actions, they are no longer wanting to "ban all guns", just to get "better background checks" through. Sad.
I agree... that requirement is burdensome. But there does need to be some kind of showing of innovation. It seems that 99% if patents are for things lots of people could easily do.
... is not that patents are bought and sold (this should be perfectly valid for valid patents). The real problem is that there are so many bad patents... things that are not innovative at all... things that don't fulfill the need to have a patent system. Once people start to understand what patents really are supposed to be, then we can solve the problem. It's not about trolls or software patents or things like that. It's about what justifies the government taking property rights away, and how that concept has been corrupted by corporations since the middle 1800's.
Slashdot Mirror
Obviously, then, 640kb is way overkill.
The reason businesses are against the ACA is because in order to lower the cost for people, it raises the cost for business. That's a big reason so many businesses are against it. The real solution to all this, of course, is a single-payer system.
Why do you limit this to imagination?
And Anonymous Coward, no doubt, has a very long record there.
The big problem with this idea is how do manufacturers migrate to better technology once enough people realize how much USB is crap technology?
Better yet, get people to ban the USB group from making bastard USB specs.
It's also a negative review on doing business in New York. People are just trying to make some money in the bad economy. Now they have to move over to New Jersey.
Everything is online now days. So why not have crime online, too? Oh wait, it is.
... until all the fake reviewers are in prison for 10 years, and the executives of the businesses doing this in prison for 30 years.
Or sell them to the shrinking base of Apple fans.
A truly fully secure browser would prevent them from even knowing if you use email at all, and certainly not let them get to your email.
If only this level of security were true in all browsers and versions. Maybe some day it will be.
Do not use the same browser for LinkedIn as for any web based email. Note that separate windows doesn't count as separate browsers. Unless you know how to start browsers in a truly separate way, you're better off using separate userids in your computer for each web site that might do this (lots of them).
Their client side code is running in the same web browser than the user logged in to that user's web based email with. It's a browser security issue. Once they know the domain in your email address, they know how to watch you for when you login to your email web site. They don't need the password since it is already logged in. They can't get the password used, but they can get the email contact list, and the contents of the email you are currently reading.
... I use to login to LinkedIn. That way THEIR web client code can't get into my web based email (more than one site) using holes in the browser. For each site I have configured, there is a separate virtual HOME directory the browser is using, so things like cookies and browser processes are fully separated. I can log in to LinkedIn with one process and log in to Gmail with another process and there's no information going between. I can even login to 2 or more different Gmail accounts at the same time using this kind of separation (normally one would have to use separate userids or separate machines).
... AND do not login to your email using the same browser you login to LinkedIn with. Unfortunately, most people use the same browser. Sue the browser maker and get the money back that you paid for the insecure browser.
However, if LinkedIn can figure out where you login to to read your email, which is not hard to do, AND if you are logged in to your email when they try to login as you with the same browser, then THEY can get it because it is your browser that is logging in. Wanna see how that works? Login to your email, then press Ctrl+N and make a new browser, and login to your email from the new browser. Hint: it's just a window on the same browser.
They don't need your password.
This gives them enough to access the email where the browser itself is logged in to.
Is that better than 8 hours at one place followed by 8 hours at another place, and 6 hours sleep per day, for each of 5 days a week? Probably.
I did thinking on the throne today for my current project. Started coding. Hit an incompatibility in the script I'm calling. So back to thinking. Back to the throne.
Management doesn't want you to think. They just want you to code.
Any company that tries to collect on using XOR to implement a cursor on a bit graphic screen with text is a troll, even if they filed the original patent. This is an example of non-innovation.
The problem is that too many of the patents are not innovative. Anyone can make a widget bolt. That patent should have never been issued.
NRA did not stray off ... it was pulled off track by the "ban all guns" lobby. The problem today is even well intentioned changes like "background checks for mental illness everywhere" risks the slippery slope, and the "pro guns" lobby has to fight even that to be sure "ban all guns" isn't where we end up. To fix this, liberals need to show, by their actions, they are no longer wanting to "ban all guns", just to get "better background checks" through. Sad.
I agree ... that requirement is burdensome. But there does need to be some kind of showing of innovation. It seems that 99% if patents are for things lots of people could easily do.
... is not that patents are bought and sold (this should be perfectly valid for valid patents). The real problem is that there are so many bad patents ... things that are not innovative at all ... things that don't fulfill the need to have a patent system. Once people start to understand what patents really are supposed to be, then we can solve the problem. It's not about trolls or software patents or things like that. It's about what justifies the government taking property rights away, and how that concept has been corrupted by corporations since the middle 1800's.
Read more ...