If the data is sensitive, you should be encrypting it anyway
Sure, because if the data is encrypted, the only people who can get into it are those with gigantic server farms. (Like Google)
Besides, who would be interested in random encrypted data? It would be cost prohibitive to decrypt data to peek at it, unless there are advances in supercomputing. (Which google is actively working on)
The only company which would want to do that is one which has a business model built on collecting and monetizing private data (See: Google)
Yep. I can't see any reason why people should care about where they store cloud data.
You skipped classes to spend time at work, and then say that work taught you more? That seems pretty obvious. You seem to be missing that the opposite would also be true. IF you had spent 40 hours a week on your courses, you would've learned a lot more in them.
Yes, clearly those scientists that had to repeatedly prove smoking is unhealthy were acting on a liberal agenda. I've learned from Fox News that scientists only care about political agendas, not about promoting a better society or the common welfare of people.
"You can cooperate and we can be nice, or you cannot cooperate as we will ruin your life, you kids lives, your wife's life, you parents lives and pretty much anyone else you know and care for. We will give you a few minutes to think it over".
Not to stereotype, but Anonymous members do seem to rank as some of the most misanthropic people on the planet. When somebody doesn't have kids, or a wife, and hates their parents, how much leverage does that threat have? The only people they actually care about are the ones they are being asked to rat out...
To be fair, the people in Ohio are suspected first, and THEN their electricity records are being pulled to confirm suspicions.
Whereas in Canada, it looks like any random citizen's electricity usage can be monitored by the government.
Canada has a bill of rights too, and a Charter of Rights and Freedoms, both of which are focused on protecting personal property from unreasonable search and seizure.
But it looks like using "too much" power automatically means somebody is treated like a criminal and subject to being searched to prove otherwise.
I'd just like to go over some history. Falun gong is more like Scientologists than Nazis. They dont "violently disagree" with anyone, but are in fact completely non-violent and are forbidden to kill living things for any reason. They basically have some weird beliefs, and the Chinese media was making fun of them. They had a small protest in a park because they resented being made fun of. The Chinese police responded by clubbing protesters, and arresting several. So, they held a bigger, silent protest outside party headquarters, and the Chinese government responded by banning the group, arresting everyone they could find, and torturing and killing the leaders.
How would you feel if the US govt arrested anyone associated with scientology, executed Travolta and Cruise for being part of it to dissuade others from joining, and Cisco helped make it happen? Falun Gong had NO problem with the Chinese government. They were protesting being killed by their government for no reason, and wanted that to stop. Is that really an extremist request?
And arms dealers that have sold weapons and ammo to Libya should also be shocked and appalled that a man who has been implicated repeatedly in the murder of innocent civilians across the world would actually turn those weapons on innocent civilians in his own country.
Cisco knew with 100% certainty that its products would be used to suppress free speech, hunt dissidents, and enforce the great firewall. Whether they are legally obligated or have any culpability is up to the courts to decide.
Why is this news? I caught an armadillo 20 (Twenty) years ago, and the next day read up on them and was shocked and terrified to learn they often carry leprosy.
Remotely uninstalling malicious software from an unsuspecting persons machine is a dick move? If someone was passing out cupcakes and put one on your desk without asking, would you call that a dick move also?
Fixing somebody's computer is a gift. Fixing their machine because it is attacking mine, is something I appreciate. If you don't trust a federal agency to have the authority to remove the virus, then whom do you trust? Rival hackers? Microsoft? They've done such a great job so far in containing the problem. The malware problem isn't going to go away by itself. People will not wake up one day and decide to update their machines.
That leaves people without enough income to support their family, and without the free time to schedule interviews. It takes time to look for work, and time to study their potential employer and maintain relevant job skills.
Resorting to a part time job is generally considered the worst possible outcome for someone seeking work. Do you really expect people to perform well at a job interview after digging ditches for half the day? I have worked for the corp of engineers, specifically digging ditches with a shovel, and I can assure you that nobody is in the mood for an interview after that kind of work.
If you want somebody to work to earn their unemployment benefits (which their previous paychecks have ALREADY paid into I might add), then it is no longer unemployment, it is their new job.
Lets take one of the examples, Dresden. This city had some industrial capacity which could have some impact on their war effort. However, the city was also a haven for refugees, since it had remained un-bombed the entire war. The industrial sections of that city were not targeted, the residential areas and refugee camps were. Even with 1940's technology they had a distinct choice between targets that were miles apart. The bombing took place in multiple waves. The second wave was intended to maximize civilian casualties since the air raid sirens would've been disabled by the first strike and people would've come out of their shelters to fight the fires.
In the aftermath of that bombing, despite whatever you feel about the 'old law of armed conflict', the reaction was not supportive on the allied side. Newspapers referred to it as a terror attack with no military value. Churchill himself condemned it as an act of terror! Several allied generals were horrified and publicly said so. Can you imagine if a General today spoke out against his leadership, much less in 1940's in the middle of WWII? The mass murder of civilians wasn't taken lightly, and was not dismissed as collateral damage.
You're confusing civilian with innocent civilian. Are you really saying that justifies mass rape as a wartime policy ?
It wasn't morally ambiguous to:
Drop a nuke on Hiroshima killing 80,000 civilians? (USA)
Firebomb Dresden and kill 50,000 civilians? (UK, USA)
Conduct the largest mass rape in history? (Russia)
Ship 200,000 civilians to work camps in Siberia where almost all of them died? (Russia)
It must be nice to see the world in black and white where only the "other side" should have any doubts about the actions of its leadership.
The chance of getting fined is a possible loss of revenue. Not taking credit cards is a definite loss of revenue. Not taking credit cards for a couple of weeks while you replace / reformat all machines in the company that could be hiding malware would cost far more than $110k.
To be fair, how many other industries are there in which human error, or design error, or natural disaster, can cause epic levels of destruction which can make thousands of square miles of land unusable for hundreds or thousands of years?
Deepwater horizon was very bad, but it isn't 25,000 years of damage. There is a lot of talk about "current" plants being a better design, and that Chernobyl was an unsafe design. If it is so unsafe compared to current designs, why are 11 reactors using the Chernobyl design still in operation?
With a lot of complex physics involved, along with factors of dollars, safety, and cutting corners, it is pretty easy to understand why the public has concerns. 1 mistake caused 3 mile island. 1 mistake caused Chernobyl.
1. The business working with groupon can dictate how many are sold. My company has put caps on our deals with groupons. If the deal sells out extremely quickly, then we know there is room to raise the price. It works quite well.
2. Thats a risk you take with any coupon. You want to tempt people into trying out your business, and offer a good enough product that they will return for normal price. Groupons users range across the board, but most are young urban professionals with expendable income, the prime demographic for most businesses.
It is important to note that as a business, you dictate the terms to groupon. They don't force you into a bad deal. If you lose tons of money because of a bad deal, it is your own fault. Now, having worked with groupon directly, multiple times, I think it is laughable to valuate at $25 bil.
Why would a high end restaurant want to target bargain seekers? The demographics are a complete mismatch. They won't get repeat business from that crowd, which makes the whole endeavor worthless.
Exactly. Whichever two people she thought were "young and hip", were instead just young and new to the business world. Wait a second... she was at a music festival. If I was hanging out at Ozzfest I might be confused too if someone was trying to setup business contacts and give me their card.
They were sued repeatedly because they refused to give out benefits to the vast majority of their employees. Their solution to make sure "contractors" don't get counted as employees, and they don't have to give them actual benefits, has been to fire them after 1 year, and put a 3 month hold before they can hire them again. They work very hard to ensure that most of their employees get $0 in health and vacation benefits.
I do not have any religious faith, as that is simply preposterous and absurd. I don't believe in ghosts, and I do not believe that Aliens come all the way to earth to probe the anus' of our trailer dwelling class of humanity. I also do not believe that time travel will ever be a reality.
You think that "faith" is preposterous, yet you follow that by listing things you have faith in? You seem to have absolute faith in time travel not happening based on you knowing exactly how it would happen and what impacts it would have.
It is a subjective term. I think it would be more fair to say, "it's production costs were far lower than most games". Fun enough to play for a couple hours, but it doesn't offer the same level of content as L4D by a long shot.
As much as I'd like to agree with you, there is one problem. Only 1 in 3 computers sold is a desktop, maybe less. Laptop sales outpace desktops by a very large margin. Anyone in the 18-25 college student age range owns a laptop first, and only owns a desktop if they are a techie or gamer.
The thinking back then was, 50-100 might wipe out a population, but the enemy might just have a way to shoot some down, or might strike first and knock out too many to mount a counterattack. The "Star Wars" program was after all a big fake system to make the USSR believe we could destroy hundreds of their missiles, and thus the USSR made thousands of missiles to compensate.
If you only have a few dozen missiles, then suddenly it is way more lucrative to invest in space based defenses, because then you CAN stop all of them with a really fantastic space based laser system.
Maybe these Cold Warriors suddenly recognized they could sell more weapon systems without MAD being in the way. Any guesses on how many of them have major investments in the military industrial complex?
I was more thinking a Mafia style black book of secrets being found on a body. But in your example, say Tupac's car had been loaded with solid evidence of criminal wrongdoing by other people. Would it get ignored?
Slashdot Mirror
If the data is sensitive, you should be encrypting it anyway
Sure, because if the data is encrypted, the only people who can get into it are those with gigantic server farms. (Like Google)
Besides, who would be interested in random encrypted data? It would be cost prohibitive to decrypt data to peek at it, unless there are advances in supercomputing. (Which google is actively working on)
The only company which would want to do that is one which has a business model built on collecting and monetizing private data (See: Google)
Yep. I can't see any reason why people should care about where they store cloud data.
I believe the phrase is: You are what you eat.
You skipped classes to spend time at work, and then say that work taught you more? That seems pretty obvious. You seem to be missing that the opposite would also be true. IF you had spent 40 hours a week on your courses, you would've learned a lot more in them.
Yes, clearly those scientists that had to repeatedly prove smoking is unhealthy were acting on a liberal agenda. I've learned from Fox News that scientists only care about political agendas, not about promoting a better society or the common welfare of people.
"You can cooperate and we can be nice, or you cannot cooperate as we will ruin your life, you kids lives, your wife's life, you parents lives and pretty much anyone else you know and care for. We will give you a few minutes to think it over".
Not to stereotype, but Anonymous members do seem to rank as some of the most misanthropic people on the planet. When somebody doesn't have kids, or a wife, and hates their parents, how much leverage does that threat have? The only people they actually care about are the ones they are being asked to rat out...
To be fair, the people in Ohio are suspected first, and THEN their electricity records are being pulled to confirm suspicions.
Whereas in Canada, it looks like any random citizen's electricity usage can be monitored by the government.
Canada has a bill of rights too, and a Charter of Rights and Freedoms, both of which are focused on protecting personal property from unreasonable search and seizure.
But it looks like using "too much" power automatically means somebody is treated like a criminal and subject to being searched to prove otherwise.
I'd just like to go over some history. Falun gong is more like Scientologists than Nazis. They dont "violently disagree" with anyone, but are in fact completely non-violent and are forbidden to kill living things for any reason. They basically have some weird beliefs, and the Chinese media was making fun of them. They had a small protest in a park because they resented being made fun of. The Chinese police responded by clubbing protesters, and arresting several. So, they held a bigger, silent protest outside party headquarters, and the Chinese government responded by banning the group, arresting everyone they could find, and torturing and killing the leaders.
How would you feel if the US govt arrested anyone associated with scientology, executed Travolta and Cruise for being part of it to dissuade others from joining, and Cisco helped make it happen? Falun Gong had NO problem with the Chinese government. They were protesting being killed by their government for no reason, and wanted that to stop. Is that really an extremist request?
And arms dealers that have sold weapons and ammo to Libya should also be shocked and appalled that a man who has been implicated repeatedly in the murder of innocent civilians across the world would actually turn those weapons on innocent civilians in his own country.
Cisco knew with 100% certainty that its products would be used to suppress free speech, hunt dissidents, and enforce the great firewall. Whether they are legally obligated or have any culpability is up to the courts to decide.
Won't a large percentage of the junk re-enter the earth's orbit on its own given enough time?
Why is this news? I caught an armadillo 20 (Twenty) years ago, and the next day read up on them and was shocked and terrified to learn they often carry leprosy.
Remotely uninstalling malicious software from an unsuspecting persons machine is a dick move? If someone was passing out cupcakes and put one on your desk without asking, would you call that a dick move also?
Fixing somebody's computer is a gift. Fixing their machine because it is attacking mine, is something I appreciate. If you don't trust a federal agency to have the authority to remove the virus, then whom do you trust? Rival hackers? Microsoft? They've done such a great job so far in containing the problem. The malware problem isn't going to go away by itself. People will not wake up one day and decide to update their machines.
That leaves people without enough income to support their family, and without the free time to schedule interviews. It takes time to look for work, and time to study their potential employer and maintain relevant job skills.
Resorting to a part time job is generally considered the worst possible outcome for someone seeking work. Do you really expect people to perform well at a job interview after digging ditches for half the day? I have worked for the corp of engineers, specifically digging ditches with a shovel, and I can assure you that nobody is in the mood for an interview after that kind of work.
If you want somebody to work to earn their unemployment benefits (which their previous paychecks have ALREADY paid into I might add), then it is no longer unemployment, it is their new job.
Lets take one of the examples, Dresden. This city had some industrial capacity which could have some impact on their war effort. However, the city was also a haven for refugees, since it had remained un-bombed the entire war. The industrial sections of that city were not targeted, the residential areas and refugee camps were. Even with 1940's technology they had a distinct choice between targets that were miles apart. The bombing took place in multiple waves. The second wave was intended to maximize civilian casualties since the air raid sirens would've been disabled by the first strike and people would've come out of their shelters to fight the fires.
In the aftermath of that bombing, despite whatever you feel about the 'old law of armed conflict', the reaction was not supportive on the allied side. Newspapers referred to it as a terror attack with no military value. Churchill himself condemned it as an act of terror! Several allied generals were horrified and publicly said so. Can you imagine if a General today spoke out against his leadership, much less in 1940's in the middle of WWII? The mass murder of civilians wasn't taken lightly, and was not dismissed as collateral damage.
You're confusing civilian with innocent civilian.
Are you really saying that justifies mass rape as a wartime policy ?
It wasn't morally ambiguous to: Drop a nuke on Hiroshima killing 80,000 civilians? (USA)
Firebomb Dresden and kill 50,000 civilians? (UK, USA)
Conduct the largest mass rape in history? (Russia)
Ship 200,000 civilians to work camps in Siberia where almost all of them died? (Russia)
It must be nice to see the world in black and white where only the "other side" should have any doubts about the actions of its leadership.
The chance of getting fined is a possible loss of revenue. Not taking credit cards is a definite loss of revenue. Not taking credit cards for a couple of weeks while you replace / reformat all machines in the company that could be hiding malware would cost far more than $110k.
To be fair, how many other industries are there in which human error, or design error, or natural disaster, can cause epic levels of destruction which can make thousands of square miles of land unusable for hundreds or thousands of years?
Deepwater horizon was very bad, but it isn't 25,000 years of damage. There is a lot of talk about "current" plants being a better design, and that Chernobyl was an unsafe design. If it is so unsafe compared to current designs, why are 11 reactors using the Chernobyl design still in operation?
With a lot of complex physics involved, along with factors of dollars, safety, and cutting corners, it is pretty easy to understand why the public has concerns. 1 mistake caused 3 mile island. 1 mistake caused Chernobyl.
1. The business working with groupon can dictate how many are sold. My company has put caps on our deals with groupons. If the deal sells out extremely quickly, then we know there is room to raise the price. It works quite well.
2. Thats a risk you take with any coupon. You want to tempt people into trying out your business, and offer a good enough product that they will return for normal price. Groupons users range across the board, but most are young urban professionals with expendable income, the prime demographic for most businesses.
It is important to note that as a business, you dictate the terms to groupon. They don't force you into a bad deal. If you lose tons of money because of a bad deal, it is your own fault. Now, having worked with groupon directly, multiple times, I think it is laughable to valuate at $25 bil.
Why would a high end restaurant want to target bargain seekers? The demographics are a complete mismatch. They won't get repeat business from that crowd, which makes the whole endeavor worthless.
Exactly. Whichever two people she thought were "young and hip", were instead just young and new to the business world. Wait a second... she was at a music festival. If I was hanging out at Ozzfest I might be confused too if someone was trying to setup business contacts and give me their card.
They were sued repeatedly because they refused to give out benefits to the vast majority of their employees. Their solution to make sure "contractors" don't get counted as employees, and they don't have to give them actual benefits, has been to fire them after 1 year, and put a 3 month hold before they can hire them again. They work very hard to ensure that most of their employees get $0 in health and vacation benefits.
I do not have any religious faith, as that is simply preposterous and absurd. I don't believe in ghosts, and I do not believe that Aliens come all the way to earth to probe the anus' of our trailer dwelling class of humanity. I also do not believe that time travel will ever be a reality.
You think that "faith" is preposterous, yet you follow that by listing things you have faith in? You seem to have absolute faith in time travel not happening based on you knowing exactly how it would happen and what impacts it would have.
It is a subjective term. I think it would be more fair to say, "it's production costs were far lower than most games". Fun enough to play for a couple hours, but it doesn't offer the same level of content as L4D by a long shot.
As much as I'd like to agree with you, there is one problem. Only 1 in 3 computers sold is a desktop, maybe less. Laptop sales outpace desktops by a very large margin. Anyone in the 18-25 college student age range owns a laptop first, and only owns a desktop if they are a techie or gamer.
The thinking back then was, 50-100 might wipe out a population, but the enemy might just have a way to shoot some down, or might strike first and knock out too many to mount a counterattack. The "Star Wars" program was after all a big fake system to make the USSR believe we could destroy hundreds of their missiles, and thus the USSR made thousands of missiles to compensate.
If you only have a few dozen missiles, then suddenly it is way more lucrative to invest in space based defenses, because then you CAN stop all of them with a really fantastic space based laser system.
Maybe these Cold Warriors suddenly recognized they could sell more weapon systems without MAD being in the way. Any guesses on how many of them have major investments in the military industrial complex?
I was more thinking a Mafia style black book of secrets being found on a body. But in your example, say Tupac's car had been loaded with solid evidence of criminal wrongdoing by other people. Would it get ignored?