If it's good enough to spy on Americans (who seem to be all OK with that idea) I can't see why allowing another government to do the same in its own country is suddenly such a drama.
If US citizens dislike the Iran government doing this it would be more intelligent to stop it happening in their own country first - the rest will follow as if by magic.
Sure, they are always on the news. It seems they congregate mainly at Wall Street and wear pin-striped suits. I agree that they are (a) scary and (b) need to be exterminated as a threat to health./sarcasm
Applaus. Give me what I'm looking for, and make it clearer that the top links are not links at all, but paid ads that look like links. Secondly, get rid of sites that replicate the search string to pretend they offer the service. I *hate* that as much as I hate that someone gets my search string handed over - what else do they get? If Google broadcasting my query and IP address to all such advertisiers?
We are approaching the point where the risk of using Google is exceeding the benefit of using Google..
If you absolutely have to continue suffering the worst computing experience possible, get at least Kaspersky. It works, not too much overhead and doesn't use incomprehensible blinky tray icons that won't tell you anything useful (yes, Norton, that is you).
Otherwise, enough already. I'm very weary of anything that has a complete cult as supporters, but as I also use Linux I figured I ought to try a Mac as well. I'm still not a fanboy, but I can recommend it, if only to experience what computing ought to be like. You really do not realise just how many interruptions per day you get as Windows user because something or another wants to update - only when you have been working on a Mac becomes that clear.
I guess this is also why anti-virus companies are anxious to avoid offering you a listing which tells you how many virus infections and trojans exist for each platform - you would switch, and they would lose their market..
(with apologies to various artists over the years)..
Thankfully you can switch it off, plenty of people with a fear of heights - or wearing skirts..
It would be cool if you could check if they had actually managed to get your luggage on board, but I believe that's sometimes not even in the same plane.
However, I care less for this idea than I care for places like Heathrow to sort out their luggage problems. The last time I flew into London it took me less than 5 minutes to get through passport control, and then a FULL HOUR to wait for my luggage: No, I'm not kidding. A whole hour, partly because the belt that it was arriving on had probably the most flawed design I have ever seen in well over 20 years of flying. That was the last time I flew into London without having my luggage above my head - I rather buy a shirt locally.
I go back to what I said originally: Google's claims that MS "is behind it" as a campaign effort not only don't stack up, they attempt to avoid answering the substance of the complaint.
Oh, I'm no Microsoft fan - they themselves have indeed years of blatant abuse behind them.
The problem I have is that we are talking about hard facts there - I never bought the "do no evil" bullshit and the more I see, the more I'm convinced Google is getting just as bad as Microsoft at bending the rules beyond breaking point, yet pretend it's not their fault and they didn't do anything wrong.
That's why it doesn't matter who is behind it - Google should address the issues as they are real. Instead we get the "it's Microsoft" whinge from a 10 year old which tells me (a) Microsoft has indeed a point and (b) Google knows it too and is trying to distract from the issue.
The reasons the rules are what they are is because they get reviewed and redrafted with every single incident. If traffic rules were that scrutinised, some people would never be allowed on the road and accidents would drop further.
If O'Leachy thinks he can increase passenger risk to screw another dime out of them instead of charging for breathing I think he'll have a bit of a fight on his hands. The FAA will be happy to take his license away, no problem.
I rather *walk* than use Ryan Air. O'Leachy is too busy abusing the fact that cattle has more rights than passengers.
If Wikileaks is to fulfill any "role" whatsoever it should not let itself be used as an ego vehicle for socially challenged, no, deficient people. Assange became the news instead of Wikileaks.
As with Google, it's no use stating who is "behind" something. Your options are simply disproving the allegations or facing up to the facts - only after that can you play "whodunnit" and nail them. In addition, if you want to be believed it generally helps not to be a complete d*ck when you speak to the press - as any con man will tell you, people are more ready to believe someone they like. So being bright also seems to fail on Assange's list of assets..
Given what Sony did by removing the "other OS" feature after it was used for a hack, I think I can safely say that there is no way you cannot trust Sony not to retrospectively kill other features later. I don't hack my PS/3, but the "other OS" feature was a reason for me to buy it, so the "upgrade" isn't (and has thus not happened) because I refuse to pay the price for something I didn't do, and lose a feature I PAID FOR and which is on the product description.
Imagine what happens if someone finds a way to hack the box via a movie feature - given their approach to "other OS" it is not totally bizarre to expect them to nuke the "play video" feature in a next release, so thanks Sony, but there is not going to be another penny spent on anything PS/3, or anything else that is remote changeable. Quite simply, the PS/3 as a product is dead to me, and research for any new kit (whatever type) will certainly not begin with Sony.
If a company cannot take into account a certain amount of customisation when it gets a device out in public it suggests it is totally hopeless at both market analysis and crisis management. To me, that spells "incompetence".
I note with interest that Google seems to have developed a template defense when it's caught out.
It always seems to ignore the actual issue and instead starts pointing fingers at others for "being behind it". With China it was the Chinese government (ignoring that Apple has managed to keep secrets for years in the same country), with Streetview it was the respective governments instead of Google quite simply breaking the law, and now this.
Here's news: it ain't working. Get rid of the 10 year old who appears to do your crisis management and start dealing with the problem, because problems blow up if you let them be, stick your fingers in your ears and sing "la la la, I can't hear you". It is 100% irrelevant who is behind something - if the facts are correct you do something about it, if they aren't you prove them wrong. Just stop whining.
I see that the call is not to end the war on consumers, then? I note with interest the semantic twist when they talk about "sustainable business models" - it's the music industry that got it wrong (yet again, and again) when it comes to new technology, so there is a mild lack of credibility if they want to tell ISPs and service providers how to make money.
If they would have spent the money that have waisted on unwarranted prosecution, no, pERsecution of their potential customers on researching collaboration from the start we would not have a whole generation of their customers who have seen their friend's lives wrecked by taking the money they needed for school away on frankly spurious arguments, methods evidence and calculations that have now been shown to be so far off the mark it ought to trigger automatic retrial. It sure is a novel way to engender people to your products, but there too I would forego their advice.
Ditto for the film industry. As a legitimate buyer I am getting exceptionally fed up by DVDs taking control of my player so I cannot skip the "you should not steal" bit every time I play a DVD (anything from Disney is worse as it goes straight into marketing afterwards). I bought the real thing with real money, so f*ck off. If I ever have to present to such organisations I swear I will lock the doors and spend 10 minutes droning in the worst possible way about why they should not copy and distribute my material. Every time. Oh, and that they won't be authorised to read it in any other country..
I do not copy music, but I am fed up with being treated and lectured to as a potential criminal regardless.
Oh, and Sharkey? I don't think he really needs to worry about anyone copying *his* music, I can see why he changed jobs..
It is PERFECTLY possible to set up an alternative to Visa and Mastercard. The only reason no-one has managed yet is because the cost of a new hardware rollout would be prohibitive - if you were silly enough to try and replicate a model which is 15 years old and no longer needed (so you don't, basically). Visa/Mastercard don't care about fraud losses because they have you paying for it in transaction fees.
However, you need a sponsor who can cough up approx $75M or so to set up the first business. In 3 years that will have enough users to richly repay that investor many times over- because users want it (I actually have quite a few retailers who would immediately join as clients). If $75M looks a lot, Visa & Mastercard turn something like 4..6 TRILLION dollars a year. If you don't hit a billion turnover in year 3 you've been asleep..
Isn't there somewhere a rule that punishes lawyers for frivolous lawsuits? No? Well, that's at least one industry that hasn't gone to hell in the crisis then..
You're right. But it would be nice if idiots stopped whining about it as if that is news. You need it, because having it brings more profit than running it plus the cost of managing the risks - simple business calculation, and there isn't much more to it. I'm fed up with the BS spouted by journalists and consultancies keen to flog the most expensive advice they can get away with. It's not magic..
Someone in need of some new fear? Products to sell or a new restrictive law coming up? Journo in need of hits?
1 - Secure what are secrets, and please lose the idea that security is a technical problem. It's a people problem first. You have information because you work with it, and anyone able to access that data as part of their work is a potential leak in itself.
2 - Any observation takes effort, so espionage is typically focused - stay alert if you're doing something interesting.
3 - The more data you collect, the larger the haystack becomes for a needle to hide. What happened in 9/11 demonstrated quite clearly that HUMINT is the best, but is a lot more costly. The TSA kindly proved afterwards that doing it any other way is just a way to make a couple of people very rich, but it won't contribute to security. Oh, and it proved that you don't even need to go abroad to find an untrustworthy government..
4 - Stop worrying people about what can go wrong. Every time of the day we are exposed to threats. The builder may have used asbestos, some driver may be on drugs and run you over, your secretary may start leaking data about your affair - prevent what you can, and plan for what you cannot, then get on with your life.
5 - If you want security checked, use an expert. And by that I don't mean someone who can wave some certification around, that is great for clueless HR types to avoid blame for picking the wrong person, READ the CV. The good ones LIVE their work, and not all of them have bothered getting certified. Check, check again, and if it's critical have the work cross checked with someone else. Do NOT expect consultancies to be better or worse, I have seen risk management done by a Big Name setup that wasn't worth 1/10th of what a client paid for it and actually put lives at risk if there had been a crisis. Ditto with security.
6 - Remember the law. If you let your security be tested by a setup that has been put under order to report back (UK Regulation of Investigative Powers Act springs to mind) you have just given a list of weaknesses to that same government you were so worried about. It may pay to look abroad, where such reports will have to be stored properly and cannot be accessed other than by leaving a paper trail.
Just don't think that buying a lot of kit will sort it all out, or that there is such a thing as risk free operations. Plan for failure so you can deal with it if it happens and. do. not. forget. the. people. in. this. effort..
We will take your money, but you should not have the temerity to demand anything in return. Hell, you should not even *expect* anything in return. Just give us your money.
Wow, violence. Yeah, that will solve everything. Did you actually read any part of the articles linked?
First off, the area will be marked, secondly it's announced and thirdly you should expect stuff like this to happen at a hacker conference. If you can't handle that, stay away. This is demonstrated to provide proof of a flaw so it can be addressed.
I can remember the last Access All Areas in London where people wandered in off the street and started checking their email on the computers we had installed there. I mean, how dumb can you get?
Ballmer is a show monkey and a bully, but has so far not displayed any notable talent whatsoever. He does not lead, because for leading you need a vision and the drive to make it happen, and that takes a modicum of intelligence. Ballmer is the perfect no2 because he simply does what you tell him to do, but he has failed to display *any* capability to be number 1.
I reckon Gates may come back a la Jobs, thinking he can do the same. He may even try a roll neck jumper himself, but he won't manage. Not because he's not as much a control freak, but he has a different style that doesn't work right now. Apple pulled off a coup because it did something new, Gates hasn't got the right leadership model to unleash the brains the company bought in to stop them from competing, he's better at, umm, "borrowing" ideas..
MS isn't dead, that will take years. But I wouldn't buy shares in them right now.
There is no reasonable expectation of privacy when you broadcast information from your home in an unsecured form.
Disagree. This still requires deliberate access of a resource you know not to be your own. That you leave the door open does not make walking in and helping yourself to anything in the house legal.
This is also the main argument why a WiFi enabled device should not automatically join an unprotected network. That it is often done does not make it legal, but in Google's case we're even talking about deliberately setting up for this..
Slashdot Mirror
If it's good enough to spy on Americans (who seem to be all OK with that idea) I can't see why allowing another government to do the same in its own country is suddenly such a drama.
If US citizens dislike the Iran government doing this it would be more intelligent to stop it happening in their own country first - the rest will follow as if by magic.
*Applaus*
Congratulations, that was one of the funniest debunks I've seen in a while here. LOL..
"You ever seen a NYC sewer rat, son?"
Sure, they are always on the news. It seems they congregate mainly at Wall Street and wear pin-striped suits. I agree that they are (a) scary and (b) need to be exterminated as a threat to health. /sarcasm
Applaus. Give me what I'm looking for, and make it clearer that the top links are not links at all, but paid ads that look like links. Secondly, get rid of sites that replicate the search string to pretend they offer the service. I *hate* that as much as I hate that someone gets my search string handed over - what else do they get? If Google broadcasting my query and IP address to all such advertisiers?
We are approaching the point where the risk of using Google is exceeding the benefit of using Google..
If you absolutely have to continue suffering the worst computing experience possible, get at least Kaspersky. It works, not too much overhead and doesn't use incomprehensible blinky tray icons that won't tell you anything useful (yes, Norton, that is you).
Otherwise, enough already. I'm very weary of anything that has a complete cult as supporters, but as I also use Linux I figured I ought to try a Mac as well. I'm still not a fanboy, but I can recommend it, if only to experience what computing ought to be like. You really do not realise just how many interruptions per day you get as Windows user because something or another wants to update - only when you have been working on a Mac becomes that clear.
I guess this is also why anti-virus companies are anxious to avoid offering you a listing which tells you how many virus infections and trojans exist for each platform - you would switch, and they would lose their market..
(with apologies to various artists over the years)..
Thankfully you can switch it off, plenty of people with a fear of heights - or wearing skirts..
It would be cool if you could check if they had actually managed to get your luggage on board, but I believe that's sometimes not even in the same plane.
However, I care less for this idea than I care for places like Heathrow to sort out their luggage problems. The last time I flew into London it took me less than 5 minutes to get through passport control, and then a FULL HOUR to wait for my luggage: No, I'm not kidding. A whole hour, partly because the belt that it was arriving on had probably the most flawed design I have ever seen in well over 20 years of flying. That was the last time I flew into London without having my luggage above my head - I rather buy a shirt locally.
I go back to what I said originally: Google's claims that MS "is behind it" as a campaign effort not only don't stack up, they attempt to avoid answering the substance of the complaint.
And guess what? http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/09/07/foundem_responds_to_google/">http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/09/07/foundem_responds_to_google/. QED.
Isn't it annoying when I'm right? :-)
Oh, I'm no Microsoft fan - they themselves have indeed years of blatant abuse behind them.
The problem I have is that we are talking about hard facts there - I never bought the "do no evil" bullshit and the more I see, the more I'm convinced Google is getting just as bad as Microsoft at bending the rules beyond breaking point, yet pretend it's not their fault and they didn't do anything wrong.
That's why it doesn't matter who is behind it - Google should address the issues as they are real. Instead we get the "it's Microsoft" whinge from a 10 year old which tells me (a) Microsoft has indeed a point and (b) Google knows it too and is trying to distract from the issue.
The reasons the rules are what they are is because they get reviewed and redrafted with every single incident. If traffic rules were that scrutinised, some people would never be allowed on the road and accidents would drop further.
If O'Leachy thinks he can increase passenger risk to screw another dime out of them instead of charging for breathing I think he'll have a bit of a fight on his hands. The FAA will be happy to take his license away, no problem.
I rather *walk* than use Ryan Air. O'Leachy is too busy abusing the fact that cattle has more rights than passengers.
.. the ego has crash-landed.
If Wikileaks is to fulfill any "role" whatsoever it should not let itself be used as an ego vehicle for socially challenged, no, deficient people. Assange became the news instead of Wikileaks.
As with Google, it's no use stating who is "behind" something. Your options are simply disproving the allegations or facing up to the facts - only after that can you play "whodunnit" and nail them. In addition, if you want to be believed it generally helps not to be a complete d*ck when you speak to the press - as any con man will tell you, people are more ready to believe someone they like. So being bright also seems to fail on Assange's list of assets..
Given what Sony did by removing the "other OS" feature after it was used for a hack, I think I can safely say that there is no way you cannot trust Sony not to retrospectively kill other features later. I don't hack my PS/3, but the "other OS" feature was a reason for me to buy it, so the "upgrade" isn't (and has thus not happened) because I refuse to pay the price for something I didn't do, and lose a feature I PAID FOR and which is on the product description.
Imagine what happens if someone finds a way to hack the box via a movie feature - given their approach to "other OS" it is not totally bizarre to expect them to nuke the "play video" feature in a next release, so thanks Sony, but there is not going to be another penny spent on anything PS/3, or anything else that is remote changeable. Quite simply, the PS/3 as a product is dead to me, and research for any new kit (whatever type) will certainly not begin with Sony.
If a company cannot take into account a certain amount of customisation when it gets a device out in public it suggests it is totally hopeless at both market analysis and crisis management. To me, that spells "incompetence".
No thanks.
I note with interest that Google seems to have developed a template defense when it's caught out.
It always seems to ignore the actual issue and instead starts pointing fingers at others for "being behind it". With China it was the Chinese government (ignoring that Apple has managed to keep secrets for years in the same country), with Streetview it was the respective governments instead of Google quite simply breaking the law, and now this.
Here's news: it ain't working. Get rid of the 10 year old who appears to do your crisis management and start dealing with the problem, because problems blow up if you let them be, stick your fingers in your ears and sing "la la la, I can't hear you". It is 100% irrelevant who is behind something - if the facts are correct you do something about it, if they aren't you prove them wrong. Just stop whining.
Pathetic.
That's what I mean - a has been, he kind of disappeared into a hole.
OMD is still around, and Roxy Music were actually playing live on TV, with even a tour planned for 2011..
(note: not impressed with that YouTube song, though)
I see that the call is not to end the war on consumers, then? I note with interest the semantic twist when they talk about "sustainable business models" - it's the music industry that got it wrong (yet again, and again) when it comes to new technology, so there is a mild lack of credibility if they want to tell ISPs and service providers how to make money.
If they would have spent the money that have waisted on unwarranted prosecution, no, pERsecution of their potential customers on researching collaboration from the start we would not have a whole generation of their customers who have seen their friend's lives wrecked by taking the money they needed for school away on frankly spurious arguments, methods evidence and calculations that have now been shown to be so far off the mark it ought to trigger automatic retrial. It sure is a novel way to engender people to your products, but there too I would forego their advice.
Ditto for the film industry. As a legitimate buyer I am getting exceptionally fed up by DVDs taking control of my player so I cannot skip the "you should not steal" bit every time I play a DVD (anything from Disney is worse as it goes straight into marketing afterwards). I bought the real thing with real money, so f*ck off. If I ever have to present to such organisations I swear I will lock the doors and spend 10 minutes droning in the worst possible way about why they should not copy and distribute my material. Every time. Oh, and that they won't be authorised to read it in any other country..
I do not copy music, but I am fed up with being treated and lectured to as a potential criminal regardless.
Oh, and Sharkey? I don't think he really needs to worry about anyone copying *his* music, I can see why he changed jobs..
It is PERFECTLY possible to set up an alternative to Visa and Mastercard. The only reason no-one has managed yet is because the cost of a new hardware rollout would be prohibitive - if you were silly enough to try and replicate a model which is 15 years old and no longer needed (so you don't, basically). Visa/Mastercard don't care about fraud losses because they have you paying for it in transaction fees.
However, you need a sponsor who can cough up approx $75M or so to set up the first business. In 3 years that will have enough users to richly repay that investor many times over- because users want it (I actually have quite a few retailers who would immediately join as clients). If $75M looks a lot, Visa & Mastercard turn something like 4..6 TRILLION dollars a year. If you don't hit a billion turnover in year 3 you've been asleep..
Easy - use fiber for the string to carry the light :-)
Isn't there somewhere a rule that punishes lawyers for frivolous lawsuits? No?
Well, that's at least one industry that hasn't gone to hell in the crisis then..
I think this guy deserves a visit from the Google Homeview team..
You're right. But it would be nice if idiots stopped whining about it as if that is news. You need it, because having it brings more profit than running it plus the cost of managing the risks - simple business calculation, and there isn't much more to it. I'm fed up with the BS spouted by journalists and consultancies keen to flog the most expensive advice they can get away with. It's not magic..
Someone in need of some new fear? Products to sell or a new restrictive law coming up? Journo in need of hits?
1 - Secure what are secrets, and please lose the idea that security is a technical problem. It's a people problem first. You have information because you work with it, and anyone able to access that data as part of their work is a potential leak in itself.
2 - Any observation takes effort, so espionage is typically focused - stay alert if you're doing something interesting.
3 - The more data you collect, the larger the haystack becomes for a needle to hide. What happened in 9/11 demonstrated quite clearly that HUMINT is the best, but is a lot more costly. The TSA kindly proved afterwards that doing it any other way is just a way to make a couple of people very rich, but it won't contribute to security. Oh, and it proved that you don't even need to go abroad to find an untrustworthy government..
4 - Stop worrying people about what can go wrong. Every time of the day we are exposed to threats. The builder may have used asbestos, some driver may be on drugs and run you over, your secretary may start leaking data about your affair - prevent what you can, and plan for what you cannot, then get on with your life.
5 - If you want security checked, use an expert. And by that I don't mean someone who can wave some certification around, that is great for clueless HR types to avoid blame for picking the wrong person, READ the CV. The good ones LIVE their work, and not all of them have bothered getting certified. Check, check again, and if it's critical have the work cross checked with someone else. Do NOT expect consultancies to be better or worse, I have seen risk management done by a Big Name setup that wasn't worth 1/10th of what a client paid for it and actually put lives at risk if there had been a crisis. Ditto with security.
6 - Remember the law. If you let your security be tested by a setup that has been put under order to report back (UK Regulation of Investigative Powers Act springs to mind) you have just given a list of weaknesses to that same government you were so worried about. It may pay to look abroad, where such reports will have to be stored properly and cannot be accessed other than by leaving a paper trail.
Just don't think that buying a lot of kit will sort it all out, or that there is such a thing as risk free operations. Plan for failure so you can deal with it if it happens and. do. not. forget. the. people. in. this. effort..
We will take your money, but you should not have the temerity to demand anything in return. Hell, you should not even *expect* anything in return. Just give us your money.
is he spoofing a cell tower
Yup, but without the altitude :-). What I'm more interested in is how one defends against that. What can be done to make cellphone calls more secure.
Wow, violence. Yeah, that will solve everything. Did you actually read any part of the articles linked?
First off, the area will be marked, secondly it's announced and thirdly you should expect stuff like this to happen at a hacker conference. If you can't handle that, stay away. This is demonstrated to provide proof of a flaw so it can be addressed.
I can remember the last Access All Areas in London where people wandered in off the street and started checking their email on the computers we had installed there. I mean, how dumb can you get?
Ballmer is a show monkey and a bully, but has so far not displayed any notable talent whatsoever. He does not lead, because for leading you need a vision and the drive to make it happen, and that takes a modicum of intelligence. Ballmer is the perfect no2 because he simply does what you tell him to do, but he has failed to display *any* capability to be number 1.
I reckon Gates may come back a la Jobs, thinking he can do the same. He may even try a roll neck jumper himself, but he won't manage. Not because he's not as much a control freak, but he has a different style that doesn't work right now. Apple pulled off a coup because it did something new, Gates hasn't got the right leadership model to unleash the brains the company bought in to stop them from competing, he's better at, umm, "borrowing" ideas..
MS isn't dead, that will take years. But I wouldn't buy shares in them right now.
There is no reasonable expectation of privacy when you broadcast information from your home in an unsecured form.
Disagree. This still requires deliberate access of a resource you know not to be your own. That you leave the door open does not make walking in and helping yourself to anything in the house legal.
This is also the main argument why a WiFi enabled device should not automatically join an unprotected network. That it is often done does not make it legal, but in Google's case we're even talking about deliberately setting up for this..