This is daft, the hardened prison inmate is almost 100% certain to view you as prey and to happily exploit your trust. Your understanding of people is simply backward, the convict *will* fuck with you if he wants to, you need not "give him a reason to". Your average church goer on the other hand almost certainly needs to be given a reason to care about you. You may not find acceptable the things that would cause the church goer to take an interest in you. But if you believe that as long as you do nothing to attract their attention you are safe from the average convict you are dangerously deluded.
Just happened to be staying in the same hotel and I don't recall what started us off but some how we struck up a conversation and he wound up telling me some great stories.
The story about the guy in the FexEx box is even better than the article makes out. Since they couldn't actually ship a person via FedEx for many reasons, the box had to seem to come from the right location which would have meant putting it on a plane, and what not. So to make it all look right Steve got himself a real FedEx uniform and put FexEx stickers on the side of a van and even had one of those scanner guns the delivery people used and pretended to be a FedEx delivery person in order to drop off their "package". As I recall he even picked up all their out going FexEx packages and dropped them off at the local FedEx center to fully make the deception work.
It was one of my more interesting random conversations, at some point they should write a book about this stuff, he had lots more stories than just this one. But yeah basically if someone really wants to get inside your building and steal your stuff badly enough they will.
Yes you need physical security, to prevent the guy in the FedEx box replacing your keyboard with one with a hardware key logger. And planting a transmitter inside your machine to send out the data wirelessly once it has your encryption passwords.
To further show what a terrible idea pushing videos ads is, I had not bothered to get F.B. Purity until now, but just the thought of having vid ads with sound pushed at me was enough to make me go and get everything blocked.
However visions of the Aesculaptor Mark 3 from Logan's Run may make me conclude that the good old fashioned Mark I Eye Ball is still up to the task.
I think after years of surviving being stuck in the arm by humans I can decline to avail myself of this one particular advancement without feeling I've suddenly gone Luddite
The article author seems to assume that patented technology just falls from the sky and comes for free to the lucky patent holder who then exploits the rest of the world, when they say;
"But the patents had devastating real-world implications, because they kept the prices for the diagnostics artificially high."
they are arguing from false premises. Now in this case I happen to agree with not allowing patents on unmodified genes however it is still the case that the prices are only artificially high if the diagnostics would have existed had it not been possible to acquire patents on them in the first place,
According to the article it would have been ok if they had gotten the patents if they were motivated to save lives rather than make money. This is not an article which rationally discussed the problems of the patent system, and those problems are legion, it is an article that says if you try and make money you are bad. Not really very interesting.
You expect local legislatures and police to respect SCOTUS rulings? How quaint a notion. Well after they arrest you and convict you perhaps on appeal they will see the error of their ways.
Oh goodness, in what world is your hysterical idea of a business losing customers endangerment?
At least come close to reality with your fantasies.
Oh the wonders of the internet if someone says anything we don't like they are in a fantasy land? Seriously? You clearly can't read or make any judgements for yourself that you need me to specify that the first two are obvious endangerments, the next is malicious falsehood which may lead to reputational injury which is a damage to business property, which happens to be a crime in NY called.....
Reckless endangerment of property.
A person is guilty of reckless endangerment of property when he recklessly engages in conduct which creates a substantial risk of damage to the property of another person in an amount exceeding two hundred fifty dollars.
So it would be pretty easy to cause a lost of business exceeding $250, thus endangerment.
The last one is what we who can separate reality from fantasy like to call sarcasm, but since you seem to have trouble I'll admit that I don't think it would represent endangerment of the reputation of the City of Chicago since they don't have any reputation left to endanger.
What world do you live in? Police don't just raid a house because of some tag on Google Earth. What nonsense. You think we have a fleet of detectives monitoring Facebook in case someone posts "committin' a crime right naw!" And we announce ourselves so the homeowner would have no doubt it's the police and not some "intruder breaking down their door at 3am."!
What world do you live in sir? Clearly not the same one the rest of us do.
The app lists 13 "Marking Categories" that the app user can select from, of those, depending on the jurisdiction, as many as 5 are items which should be reported directly to law enforcement as they are not "issues of concern" but "violations of law", these include;
So using the app to tag these locations rather than properly report them will decrease local safety not increase it. Of course how the tagger is supposed to know of some of the "possibles" without actually knowing one way or the other is another question entirely. Either you have seen guns left around the house unlocked/loaded or you haven't, or you are tagging based on not having direct information in which case you are very likely opening yourself up to a libel suit.
Someone tags as dangerous an address (incorrectly) where there is no registered gun owner, police raid house looking for illegal guns, shoot family dog in the process.
Someone tags as dangerous an address (maliciously) where there is a registered gun owner, police raid house. shoot gun owner who pulls gun on intruders breaking down their door at 3am.
Someone tags as dangerous a business (incorrectly), which loses business due to customers (incorrectly) avoiding it, people loose jobs.
Someone tags (correctly) the whole of the South side of the City of Chicago, city sues everyone who tagged any location for harming the reputation of such a fine city.
Using someone else's login to access a computer...... so I am a felon each time I buy something with my wife's amazon account.
There needs to be a serious effort made to roll these laws back, or complaints about Google+ requiring real names on account will soon be the least of the concerns of anyone who ever tries to go on line for any reason.
This is so true I have quite a few patents and I see it every day while doing art searches the number of patents claiming things that anyone with even a half way decent understanding or education in the field would recognize as already having been done "way back in the good old days".
The AC isn't on the generator, but the air movers are, and the refrigerators and the sump pumps, kitchen lines for a toaster over, and a line n the garage so my elderly relatives can start the snow blower if I'm not home, some other water pumps. I'm not lecturing, although since you can't be bothered to read what I wrote about having to design for the surge load or the generator stalls, because I not being the genius that you apparently are, can't tell in advance when the power is going to go out and have everything turned off before the generator tries to start up.
Given that the generator keeps my house from flooding in long heavy rains, my pipes from freeze because I don't have heat in the winter, or the food from going bad during a rolling summer blackout. I would say that most people can't afford *not* to have plans for backup power. If you live somewhere that the power goes out a lot in bad weather this isn't "luxury" for the rich, its called a cheap investment to avoid much higher weather related losses
All the replies complaining that I can't possible need 10KW should go and read some list like this http://www.generatorsales.com/wattage-calculator.asp and look at both what you would want to run not just for a short time, but in the case of a generator for say days at a time in a major outage, and also since my generator is auto start/auto switch over, look at the *peak* loads that might be generated by devices like sump pumps air conditioners, the various submersed pumps in the house to pump 'stuff' from the basement sink/bathroom/washing machine up to the level of the septic system, refrigerators, at the time the power fails. Also remember that when you bring the power back on many devices that weren't even running will still give you a turn on power surge. If that is higher than the generator's capacity it will stall and fail to start up.
So no it doesn't use that all the time, but when the power goes out an this single battery system for multiple houses kicks in, who is going to remember to turn off their AC? Who is going to say "well the other people will turn off their AC so I can leave mine own" Thinking "if I optimize I can make the power last X hours" isn't how it would work out in the real world for most people. And if it doesn't work for most people then it isn't as great an idea as people think.
Lets see, my 10kW generator doesn't even power my whole house, and a 10kWH battery set is supposed to provide electricity to 5 houses for 2 hours, that would be 1kW a house. Somehow this seems to be a new use of the word "provide" I was not previously aware of.
500 times faster and 1000 times smaller and this should have a title even mentioning NAND because why?
It would be like going "New SRAM just produced is much faster than DRAM!!!!" without bothering to mention those minor issues of size, cost, power, etc that make SRAM != DRAM.
When H.F.T. first came out the approach of "buy when its going up and sell as soon as it ticked down" made some people a lot of money, because the H.F.T was just piggybacking on some human that had decided to move the stock for some reason that made sense. Now that so many of the trades are from H.F.T. algorithms what you have are computers piggybacking on computers moving the stock price all by themselves, and thus we have a feedback system with less and less damping as the percent of the trades that don't involve a person gets larger and larger.
Which of the many suggestions to prevent H.F.T. should be implemented is a whole topic by itself, but at this point H.F.T is now actively harming the purpose of the stock markets, that of providing a way for companies to get liquidity and for people to be able to *invest* in companies. It was good while it lasted for some people but it is time for H.F.T. to be consigned to the history books.
Realizing how many links there already were to the page in question from other sites, the fact that it still doesn't appear in the googlecache now seems quite strange. Either that or there is some other tag I am missing that is preventing any indexing of the site.
I'm too lazy to dig up wherever I read it, maybe it was a comment on hacker news, but it sounded like it had about another week to go before expiration.
Actually you can't look it up. I was surprised when I did a search for the link that no hits from the actual site came up. So I tried forcing the link in googlecache and still got nothing so I checked the page source at petitions.whitehouse.gov and all the links have no-follow on them. Strange really, why would such an exercise in open government want to make sure there were no search engine results that brought people to the petitions or any record of what had appeared on the site.
I'm thinking someone needs to set up a shadow copy of the site with links to all the pages created on petitions.whitehouse.gov so they get seeded into the search engines, since supposedly the no-follow only stops the initial indexing, if the page gets in from some other link it should stay in the search engine.
I guess I'm just not sure how the first half of your post relates to the second. What actually happened sounds fairly reasonable and not anything like what TFA is talking about; they didn't try to smoke the attacker, they found them and reported them.
You are missing that in order to report them they had to break into all the machines on the control path back to the source. If using exploit penetration tools to compromise attack machines and their command/control nodes isn't "hacking" I'm not sure what your definition of the word is.
Equal to "If someone breaks into your home, you should be able to break into their home."
More like, "your neighbor is throwing rocks through your windows from inside his house and the police can't be troubled to do anything about it so you go over and stop him, and if his door is locked you may have to break it down"
Slashdot Mirror
This is daft, the hardened prison inmate is almost 100% certain to view you as prey and to happily exploit your trust. Your understanding of people is simply backward, the convict *will* fuck with you if he wants to, you need not "give him a reason to". Your average church goer on the other hand almost certainly needs to be given a reason to care about you. You may not find acceptable the things that would cause the church goer to take an interest in you. But if you believe that as long as you do nothing to attract their attention you are safe from the average convict you are dangerously deluded.
Just happened to be staying in the same hotel and I don't recall what started us off but some how we struck up a conversation and he wound up telling me some great stories.
The story about the guy in the FexEx box is even better than the article makes out. Since they couldn't actually ship a person via FedEx for many reasons, the box had to seem to come from the right location which would have meant putting it on a plane, and what not. So to make it all look right Steve got himself a real FedEx uniform and put FexEx stickers on the side of a van and even had one of those scanner guns the delivery people used and pretended to be a FedEx delivery person in order to drop off their "package". As I recall he even picked up all their out going FexEx packages and dropped them off at the local FedEx center to fully make the deception work.
It was one of my more interesting random conversations, at some point they should write a book about this stuff, he had lots more stories than just this one. But yeah basically if someone really wants to get inside your building and steal your stuff badly enough they will.
Yes you need physical security, to prevent the guy in the FedEx box replacing your keyboard with one with a hardware key logger. And planting a transmitter inside your machine to send out the data wirelessly once it has your encryption passwords.
If history teaches anything it is that just because an insecure protocol should not be used does not mean it will not be used.
If anything since "insecure ~= simpler than a secure protocol" it almost insures it will be used.
To further show what a terrible idea pushing videos ads is, I had not bothered to get F.B. Purity until now, but just the thought of having vid ads with sound pushed at me was enough to make me go and get everything blocked.
However visions of the Aesculaptor Mark 3 from Logan's Run may make me conclude that the good old fashioned Mark I Eye Ball is still up to the task.
I think after years of surviving being stuck in the arm by humans I can decline to avail myself of this one particular advancement without feeling I've suddenly gone Luddite
The article author seems to assume that patented technology just falls from the sky and comes for free to the lucky patent holder who then exploits the rest of the world, when they say;
"But the patents had devastating real-world implications, because they kept the prices for the diagnostics artificially high."
they are arguing from false premises. Now in this case I happen to agree with not allowing patents on unmodified genes however it is still the case that the prices are only artificially high if the diagnostics would have existed had it not been possible to acquire patents on them in the first place,
According to the article it would have been ok if they had gotten the patents if they were motivated to save lives rather than make money. This is not an article which rationally discussed the problems of the patent system, and those problems are legion, it is an article that says if you try and make money you are bad. Not really very interesting.
You expect local legislatures and police to respect SCOTUS rulings? How quaint a notion. Well after they arrest you and convict you perhaps on appeal they will see the error of their ways.
Oh goodness, in what world is your hysterical idea of a business losing customers endangerment?
At least come close to reality with your fantasies.
Oh the wonders of the internet if someone says anything we don't like they are in a fantasy land? Seriously? You clearly can't read or make any judgements for yourself that you need me to specify that the first two are obvious endangerments, the next is malicious falsehood which may lead to reputational injury which is a damage to business property, which happens to be a crime in NY called.....
Reckless endangerment of property.
A person is guilty of reckless endangerment of property when he recklessly engages in conduct which creates a substantial risk of damage to the property of another person in an amount exceeding two hundred fifty dollars.
So it would be pretty easy to cause a lost of business exceeding $250, thus endangerment.
The last one is what we who can separate reality from fantasy like to call sarcasm, but since you seem to have trouble I'll admit that I don't think it would represent endangerment of the reputation of the City of Chicago since they don't have any reputation left to endanger.
What world do you live in? Police don't just raid a house because of some tag on Google Earth. What nonsense. You think we have a fleet of detectives monitoring Facebook in case someone posts "committin' a crime right naw!" And we announce ourselves so the homeowner would have no doubt it's the police and not some "intruder breaking down their door at 3am."!
What world do you live in sir? Clearly not the same one the rest of us do.
http://www.cato.org/raidmap
http://www.wnd.com/2012/08/cops-kill-dog-handcuff-kids-in-wrong-house-raid/
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/55875924-78/lake-salt-landvatter-police.html.csp
http://www.nytimes.com/1998/05/26/nyregion/raids-and-complaints-rise-as-city-draws-on-drug-tips.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm
http://www.wave3.com/story/1495631/false-tip-leads-police-to-raid-house-of-sleeping-family?clienttype=printable
and just because you are wearing a badge and say you are the police doesn't mean that you are
http://www.khou.com/news/local/HPD-Police-impersonators-using-fake-raids-to-rob-illegal-game-rooms-135144963.html
And your suggestion that the police do not read online sources or respond to tips that might come from them is also quite absurd
http://reason.com/blog/2011/01/25/the-saga-of-travis-corcoran
The app lists 13 "Marking Categories" that the app user can select from, of those, depending on the jurisdiction, as many as 5 are items which should be reported directly to law enforcement as they are not "issues of concern" but "violations of law", these include;
“Possible unlocked/loaded/unsafe storage”
“Possible insufficient training”
“Documented/frequent unlawful discharge”
“Possible illegal weapons on premises”
“Possible prohibited persons”
So using the app to tag these locations rather than properly report them will decrease local safety not increase it. Of course how the tagger is supposed to know of some of the "possibles" without actually knowing one way or the other is another question entirely. Either you have seen guns left around the house unlocked/loaded or you haven't, or you are tagging based on not having direct information in which case you are very likely opening yourself up to a libel suit.
Its worse than Libel, its endangerment.
Someone tags as dangerous an address (incorrectly) where there is no registered gun owner, police raid house looking for illegal guns, shoot family dog in the process.
Someone tags as dangerous an address (maliciously) where there is a registered gun owner, police raid house. shoot gun owner who pulls gun on intruders breaking down their door at 3am.
Someone tags as dangerous a business (incorrectly), which loses business due to customers (incorrectly) avoiding it, people loose jobs.
Someone tags (correctly) the whole of the South side of the City of Chicago, city sues everyone who tagged any location for harming the reputation of such a fine city.
Using someone else's login to access a computer...... so I am a felon each time I buy something with my wife's amazon account.
There needs to be a serious effort made to roll these laws back, or complaints about Google+ requiring real names on account will soon be the least of the concerns of anyone who ever tries to go on line for any reason.
Said the Earth.
are doomed to think they have (re)invented it.
This is so true I have quite a few patents and I see it every day while doing art searches the number of patents claiming things that anyone with even a half way decent understanding or education in the field would recognize as already having been done "way back in the good old days".
The AC isn't on the generator, but the air movers are, and the refrigerators and the sump pumps, kitchen lines for a toaster over, and a line n the garage so my elderly relatives can start the snow blower if I'm not home, some other water pumps. I'm not lecturing, although since you can't be bothered to read what I wrote about having to design for the surge load or the generator stalls, because I not being the genius that you apparently are, can't tell in advance when the power is going to go out and have everything turned off before the generator tries to start up.
Given that the generator keeps my house from flooding in long heavy rains, my pipes from freeze because I don't have heat in the winter, or the food from going bad during a rolling summer blackout. I would say that most people can't afford *not* to have plans for backup power. If you live somewhere that the power goes out a lot in bad weather this isn't "luxury" for the rich, its called a cheap investment to avoid much higher weather related losses
All the replies complaining that I can't possible need 10KW should go and read some list like this
http://www.generatorsales.com/wattage-calculator.asp
and look at both what you would want to run not just for a short time, but in the case of a generator for say days at a time in a major outage, and also since my generator is auto start/auto switch over, look at the *peak* loads that might be generated by devices like sump pumps air conditioners, the various submersed pumps in the house to pump 'stuff' from the basement sink/bathroom/washing machine up to the level of the septic system, refrigerators, at the time the power fails. Also remember that when you bring the power back on many devices that weren't even running will still give you a turn on power surge. If that is higher than the generator's capacity it will stall and fail to start up.
So no it doesn't use that all the time, but when the power goes out an this single battery system for multiple houses kicks in, who is going to remember to turn off their AC? Who is going to say "well the other people will turn off their AC so I can leave mine own" Thinking "if I optimize I can make the power last X hours" isn't how it would work out in the real world for most people. And if it doesn't work for most people then it isn't as great an idea as people think.
Lets see, my 10kW generator doesn't even power my whole house, and a 10kWH battery set is supposed to provide electricity to 5 houses for 2 hours, that would be 1kW a house. Somehow this seems to be a new use of the word "provide" I was not previously aware of.
500 times faster and 1000 times smaller and this should have a title even mentioning NAND because why?
It would be like going "New SRAM just produced is much faster than DRAM!!!!" without bothering to mention those minor issues of size, cost, power, etc that make SRAM != DRAM.
When H.F.T. first came out the approach of "buy when its going up and sell as soon as it ticked down" made some people a lot of money, because the H.F.T was just piggybacking on some human that had decided to move the stock for some reason that made sense. Now that so many of the trades are from H.F.T. algorithms what you have are computers piggybacking on computers moving the stock price all by themselves, and thus we have a feedback system with less and less damping as the percent of the trades that don't involve a person gets larger and larger.
Which of the many suggestions to prevent H.F.T. should be implemented is a whole topic by itself, but at this point H.F.T is now actively harming the purpose of the stock markets, that of providing a way for companies to get liquidity and for people to be able to *invest* in companies. It was good while it lasted for some people but it is time for H.F.T. to be consigned to the history books.
Just because no one is buying Samsung Tabs doesn't mean no one is buying Android tablets, I have to agree with Bellal6, the OP is a fanboy.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/248776/androids_tablet_share_at_39_percent_as_sales_triple_says_study.html
Realizing how many links there already were to the page in question from other sites, the fact that it still doesn't appear in the googlecache now seems quite strange. Either that or there is some other tag I am missing that is preventing any indexing of the site.
I'm too lazy to dig up wherever I read it, maybe it was a comment on hacker news, but it sounded like it had about another week to go before expiration.
Actually you can't look it up. I was surprised when I did a search for the link that no hits from the actual site came up. So I tried forcing the link in googlecache and still got nothing so I checked the page source at petitions.whitehouse.gov and all the links have no-follow on them. Strange really, why would such an exercise in open government want to make sure there were no search engine results that brought people to the petitions or any record of what had appeared on the site.
I'm thinking someone needs to set up a shadow copy of the site with links to all the pages created on petitions.whitehouse.gov so they get seeded into the search engines, since supposedly the no-follow only stops the initial indexing, if the page gets in from some other link it should stay in the search engine.
I guess I'm just not sure how the first half of your post relates to the second. What actually happened sounds fairly reasonable and not anything like what TFA is talking about; they didn't try to smoke the attacker, they found them and reported them.
You are missing that in order to report them they had to break into all the machines on the control path back to the source. If using exploit penetration tools to compromise attack machines and their command/control nodes isn't "hacking" I'm not sure what your definition of the word is.
Equal to "If someone breaks into your home, you should be able to break into their home."
More like, "your neighbor is throwing rocks through your windows from inside his house and the police can't be troubled to do anything about it so you go over and stop him, and if his door is locked you may have to break it down"