You must trust some things some times with some data, or you can get no meaningful work done. Balancing that trust (the risk) with that data (the value) is what security is about. I put this data, that I just wrote, on this website, because it is low value and low risk. I wouldn't post here my social-security number because that would be high risk. I wouldn't post my private key here either, but I do store my private key on a hard drive I did not build myself nor did I verify myself running an OS I did not build myself nor did I verify myself because while it's high value, it is low risk due to the many rounds of secure math protecting it.
As to trusting Apple or any other corporation or government. You implicitly trust your hardware manufacturers, all of them, unless you build your own hardware from scratch. Same goes for software, even open source software.
The majority of creationists *are* Christian, but are *not* Catholic. If you are upset that Catholics' good names are sullied by creationism, you should point your anger at creationists, not those pointing out that creationists are religious nuts, because they *are* religious nuts.
You might look into using Markdown in your favorite editor. It's portable, being only text, but supports a good set of formatting. It's easy to convert to html, pdf, and other formats.
I don't. I actually delete my email rather than squirrel every last message away. If it's something worth filing, I file it, in a system that's meant to retain and search information. If it's not worth filing, I delete it. My mail box is currently: 19MB.
Most people know how to search their mail in Google. It takes a particular skill that you have and most people don't have to search their mail in Outlook. I think there's a search problem in Outlook here. It's a solved problem; we have exemplars of good solutions.
An alternative should be comparable. Ad-supported and subscription-based are pretty different types of services catering to different kinds of consumers. It was you who moved to goalposts by stating competitors that were quite different.
I don't know any Muslim country invaded by Westerners, without local Muslims (and not just a minority - e.g., in Iraq it was the Shia and Kurdish *majority* suffering under Saddam, in Afghanistan was also the *majority* - even the "United Islamic Front for the Salvation of Afghanistan"!- oppresed by the Talibans, in Libya the same...) asking us to invade.
You seem to argue that an oppressed majority calling for liberation is justification of an invasion. you did not show that just because it was a majority that was oppressed it was a majority that wished invasion. That implies that only some of the oppressed need to desire invasion to justify invasion.
If in the United States, the Christians, a majority, some of whom claim are oppressed by liberal-minded media, had a few members who called for Putin to liberate the United States, would that be more or less just an invasion in your world view?
What gets me every time I talk to a Comcast representative is that when i ask them "how much will this cost me per month?" they cannot give me a dollar amount. They always say "$149 plus taxes and fees." They do not seem to know, or be able to derive, at the time of the sales call, that figure that they are perfectly happy to compute and print on the monthly bill.
My policy is that if you can't tell me how much you will charge me, I cannot figure out if I am going to pay you. I'm forced to pass.
My Comcast has a board of directors. They only listen to their friends. They only answer to their friends. And, no surprise, many of their friends have lots of money.
With a Comcast, you have to wait for the next election, assuming you even have a chance of throwing out the previous office holders.
Well, it's a tad late now. Years ago when they were raising my rates while degrading my quality they told me over the phone that I am lying and video quality is much better now that it is HD and perhaps I don't know what I'm talking about and watching SD.
Glad to hear they've finally admitted its an issue that needs to be addressed, though, and, possibly addressed it. My neighbor though still has really shit video quality on Comcast compared to OTA, even as late as last month when he commented how vastly different my PBS feed looked. He asked if I had some sort of 4k feed or something (right!). I went down to his apartment and saw what he was watching and yeah, still night-and-day difference. Perhaps they haven't rolled out switched digital video to my area yet.
Yes, but the quote implied that non-infosec professionals did *wish* to install secondary offers. They made no statement about understanding the situation but about desire. "Desire" is the problem with that quote and what Penguinisto was pointing out.
I also googled "americans cheating", got 14.8M results, top results are about marital cheating. Of course, this might not mean much, but it's a start. Anyone wants to send a research grant my way?:)
It's not even a start. In fact, using such incredibly naive and faulty methods brings into question the rest of your post and weakens your argument.
Guilty or not, Valve reserves the right to take away from the user every purchase they have ever made on Steam, for any reason, with no legal recourse. Why anyone would agree to those terms I do not understand.
What one controls in this situation is to whom one shares one's account number. Not sharing financial information with the likes of PayPal is the solution.
changing bank accounts is pretty trivial these days to short-circuit this kind of automated bullshit.
Changing my bank account to get PayPal to comply with my wishes is silly. Not to mention that a closed account still permits withdrawals for 90 days or more, reopening the account, drawing it negative, incurring banking fees and requiring a rigmarole of banking paperwork to rectify.
This is why I would never give any company I do not trust fully my bank account number. PayPal is not a company I trust fully as they've shown they use obscure internal rules to determine which accounts they freeze and unfreeze with no oversight.
Is there a way I'm not aware of to derive a private key from a public key? If I only ever give facebook my public key how the hell would they ever get my private key? Are you saying facebook hacks my home desktops to steal private keys?
If you read what denis-The-menace wrote, you'll see Facebook could ask users to give their private key to their (presumably closed-source) client, which could do anything with it. Responding with suspecting them of having some method of deriving the private key, or that uneducated users would really only give Facebook public keys, or Facebook hacking desktops does not address denis-The-menace's actual concern: public-key cryptography is very easy to exploit when the user-base is uneducated in its use, and Facebook offering such a new service to the masses is exactly the path one would follow to inspire users to feel secure all the while sabotaging them.
I am not sure I agree with denis-The-menace, but I wanted to point out that you didn't actually address his actual concern.
If they did, were ad free, and had a back catalog of things to watch, I'd pay that. Sadly, they don't offer that and the ads are a deal breaker. They instead get no viewership from me, paid or otherwise.
I don't know. I don't need to decrypt anything. The television I watch is unencrypted. I don't pay anything per month for renting hardware or subscribing to channels which are already beamed through my home.
I used to pay for cable channels which, to make room for more internet bandwidth, were further and further compressed every month until compression artefacts were so common as to be distracting. It wasn't long before the service they were providing, which was getting worse over time, was not worth the cost they were asking, which was getting worse over time. That was ten years ago now.
If I were recording it, we would be talking about something different than live TV. I was replying to a comment about how a HTPC was necessary to watch live TV.
So, capitalism is not mandatory, then. It is the best system we have found, thus far. As you agree, there are certain issues with capitalism. Do you feel we should not look for alternatives or improvements, then?
In this particular case, it appears that the owners of the capital enterprise attempted to shift the risk onto the employees by not paying them their due when the business was doing poorly.
You say it is necessary but then give three examples of alternatives you consider worse. Which is it, the only option, or, in your opinion, the best option?
Slashdot Mirror
You must trust some things some times with some data, or you can get no meaningful work done. Balancing that trust (the risk) with that data (the value) is what security is about. I put this data, that I just wrote, on this website, because it is low value and low risk. I wouldn't post here my social-security number because that would be high risk. I wouldn't post my private key here either, but I do store my private key on a hard drive I did not build myself nor did I verify myself running an OS I did not build myself nor did I verify myself because while it's high value, it is low risk due to the many rounds of secure math protecting it.
As to trusting Apple or any other corporation or government. You implicitly trust your hardware manufacturers, all of them, unless you build your own hardware from scratch. Same goes for software, even open source software.
The majority of creationists *are* Christian, but are *not* Catholic. If you are upset that Catholics' good names are sullied by creationism, you should point your anger at creationists, not those pointing out that creationists are religious nuts, because they *are* religious nuts.
You might look into using Markdown in your favorite editor. It's portable, being only text, but supports a good set of formatting. It's easy to convert to html, pdf, and other formats.
because who doesn't have a mailbox > 2GB?
I don't. I actually delete my email rather than squirrel every last message away. If it's something worth filing, I file it, in a system that's meant to retain and search information. If it's not worth filing, I delete it. My mail box is currently: 19MB.
Most people know how to search their mail in Google. It takes a particular skill that you have and most people don't have to search their mail in Outlook. I think there's a search problem in Outlook here. It's a solved problem; we have exemplars of good solutions.
An alternative should be comparable. Ad-supported and subscription-based are pretty different types of services catering to different kinds of consumers. It was you who moved to goalposts by stating competitors that were quite different.
I don't know any Muslim country invaded by Westerners, without local Muslims (and not just a minority - e.g., in Iraq it was the Shia and Kurdish *majority* suffering under Saddam, in Afghanistan was also the *majority* - even the "United Islamic Front for the Salvation of Afghanistan"!- oppresed by the Talibans, in Libya the same...) asking us to invade.
You seem to argue that an oppressed majority calling for liberation is justification of an invasion. you did not show that just because it was a majority that was oppressed it was a majority that wished invasion. That implies that only some of the oppressed need to desire invasion to justify invasion.
If in the United States, the Christians, a majority, some of whom claim are oppressed by liberal-minded media, had a few members who called for Putin to liberate the United States, would that be more or less just an invasion in your world view?
What gets me every time I talk to a Comcast representative is that when i ask them "how much will this cost me per month?" they cannot give me a dollar amount. They always say "$149 plus taxes and fees." They do not seem to know, or be able to derive, at the time of the sales call, that figure that they are perfectly happy to compute and print on the monthly bill.
My policy is that if you can't tell me how much you will charge me, I cannot figure out if I am going to pay you. I'm forced to pass.
Comcast is accountable?
My Comcast has a board of directors. They only listen to their friends. They only answer to their friends. And, no surprise, many of their friends have lots of money.
With a Comcast, you have to wait for the next election, assuming you even have a chance of throwing out the previous office holders.
Well, it's a tad late now. Years ago when they were raising my rates while degrading my quality they told me over the phone that I am lying and video quality is much better now that it is HD and perhaps I don't know what I'm talking about and watching SD.
Glad to hear they've finally admitted its an issue that needs to be addressed, though, and, possibly addressed it. My neighbor though still has really shit video quality on Comcast compared to OTA, even as late as last month when he commented how vastly different my PBS feed looked. He asked if I had some sort of 4k feed or something (right!). I went down to his apartment and saw what he was watching and yeah, still night-and-day difference. Perhaps they haven't rolled out switched digital video to my area yet.
Yes, but the quote implied that non-infosec professionals did *wish* to install secondary offers. They made no statement about understanding the situation but about desire. "Desire" is the problem with that quote and what Penguinisto was pointing out.
I also googled "americans cheating", got 14.8M results, top results are about marital cheating. :)
Of course, this might not mean much, but it's a start. Anyone wants to send a research grant my way?
It's not even a start. In fact, using such incredibly naive and faulty methods brings into question the rest of your post and weakens your argument.
Guilty or not, Valve reserves the right to take away from the user every purchase they have ever made on Steam, for any reason, with no legal recourse. Why anyone would agree to those terms I do not understand.
What one controls in this situation is to whom one shares one's account number. Not sharing financial information with the likes of PayPal is the solution.
changing bank accounts is pretty trivial these days to short-circuit this kind of automated bullshit.
Changing my bank account to get PayPal to comply with my wishes is silly. Not to mention that a closed account still permits withdrawals for 90 days or more, reopening the account, drawing it negative, incurring banking fees and requiring a rigmarole of banking paperwork to rectify.
This is why I would never give any company I do not trust fully my bank account number. PayPal is not a company I trust fully as they've shown they use obscure internal rules to determine which accounts they freeze and unfreeze with no oversight.
Is there a way I'm not aware of to derive a private key from a public key? If I only ever give facebook my public key how the hell would they ever get my private key? Are you saying facebook hacks my home desktops to steal private keys?
If you read what denis-The-menace wrote, you'll see Facebook could ask users to give their private key to their (presumably closed-source) client, which could do anything with it. Responding with suspecting them of having some method of deriving the private key, or that uneducated users would really only give Facebook public keys, or Facebook hacking desktops does not address denis-The-menace's actual concern: public-key cryptography is very easy to exploit when the user-base is uneducated in its use, and Facebook offering such a new service to the masses is exactly the path one would follow to inspire users to feel secure all the while sabotaging them.
I am not sure I agree with denis-The-menace, but I wanted to point out that you didn't actually address his actual concern.
If they did, were ad free, and had a back catalog of things to watch, I'd pay that. Sadly, they don't offer that and the ads are a deal breaker. They instead get no viewership from me, paid or otherwise.
I would.
The HBO ads shown in their Now streams can be skipped, at least. I wonder if the same is true for Netflix ads.
I don't know. I don't need to decrypt anything. The television I watch is unencrypted. I don't pay anything per month for renting hardware or subscribing to channels which are already beamed through my home.
I used to pay for cable channels which, to make room for more internet bandwidth, were further and further compressed every month until compression artefacts were so common as to be distracting. It wasn't long before the service they were providing, which was getting worse over time, was not worth the cost they were asking, which was getting worse over time. That was ten years ago now.
If I were recording it, we would be talking about something different than live TV. I was replying to a comment about how a HTPC was necessary to watch live TV.
Why does one need a PC sitting next to the TV to watch TV? My TV has a tuner.
So, capitalism is not mandatory, then. It is the best system we have found, thus far. As you agree, there are certain issues with capitalism. Do you feel we should not look for alternatives or improvements, then?
In this particular case, it appears that the owners of the capital enterprise attempted to shift the risk onto the employees by not paying them their due when the business was doing poorly.
You say it is necessary but then give three examples of alternatives you consider worse. Which is it, the only option, or, in your opinion, the best option?