FORCING companies to take on questionable creditors
The fuck? Even assuming that the CRA you cited was FORCING banks to make expensive high-interest subprime loans, which law was FORCING companies to buy mysterious voodoo credit derivatives that pretty much everyone acknowledges they didn't understand (which is how freddie and fannie sunk themselves, "subprime" is defined as a loan not meeting their purchase requirements, yet they were more than willing to pad out their assets with these worthless instruments)?
The fact is, if it had just been banks making subprime mortgages this would have been contained as just a small crisis. The world didn't move for Indie Mac, Ameribank or any of the other banks that overextended their credit and sunk, barely a tear was shed. No, the world shook and quaked for Bear Stearns and AIG and Fannie and Freddie and even the Reserve Primary Fund. For these investors in the make-believe, the purchasers of debt and derivatives and swaps, markets soared and collapsed, government opened taxpayers' wallets, and so on.
Cry all you want about whatever laws "democrats" and "republicans" pass or don't pass, the only government people I can find at fault here are the ones who opened the vault yet again, ensuring that we'll have yet another "crisis" in a few decades time.
Some stains take more work to remove. Vegetable oil works wonders on getting oil-based paint off of tiles. Grease and a bit of work should do you fine.
lets restrict all IT work to people who have the piece of paper
HR Departments do that just fine without needing a union.
My personal view of unions is that too often they cease to be a "voice" for the employers and just suck up money for the political ambitions of the "boss".
I suspect that the "techie" solution to this is to pass around a hat and hire a lawyer when it comes time to renegotiate a contract, rather than trying to create and fund an entire perpetual organization that is only needed once in a while.
Coaxing the state government in to suing him will just cost the tax payers extra money
Then maybe, just maybe, California should drop its claim of copyright, instead of suing him to hang on to their useless claim. What an amazing idea! He's not the "douchebag" here.
because it is affecting no one.
And you know this because everyone who it could possibly be affecting would be rich enough and willing to take the time to fight it in court?
Court battles aside, on the face of it, you're wrong. Everyone who has ever had to pay an architect (who in turn has to pay for the current building codes and therefore passes that charge on) has been affected, and that's just the start. Everyone who has hired a lawyer in California has paid to cover that lawyer's access to the law, and everyone who has ever paid for the law is directly affected.
Re:Who needs privacy when people are so predictabl
on
Blown to Bits
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I don't understand why you people are so interested in privacy when you are all carbon copies of each other.
And what about the people who aren't carbon copies of each other?
I installed Safari for Windows, it insisted on enforcing the Aqua look on everything (cue Mac fans insisting that this makes it look consistent... with OSX, it looks nothing like anything else on Windows).
It is great to test sites through a webkit browser though, Safari and Chrome both catch typos and screwups that render "right" in both IE and Firefox in "strict" mode (just now fixed one caused by a missing </label> that both IE and Firefox apparently "assumed" was there).
It would be nice if Safari obeyed !important background colors on input fields, I'd like to be able to visually indicate required fields so that an observant user can fill out the form correctly the first time, rather than requiring the user to submit the form to tell them they missed a spot (either through javascript and/or on the server).
Hopefully soon, the "hype misfire" has caused all sorts of people to be spamming blogs with all sorts of links to God knows what as "secret chrome download here!"
Riiiight, because companies forcing everyone else to eat the costs of the damage they do isn't socialist at all. From each, according to their credit card #!
I never hear about a company having the laptop containing their inventory records getting stolen. Is that a function of nobody but the company caring, or do companies take better care of their "keys" than their customers'?
This is being done because admins are crying that users have to jump through hoops to use their website when they use certificates that can't be validated.
Two friends send you an invitation and ask you to RSVP:
That's the thing. You have two friends, and 3 billion not-friends. Blindly accepting every invitation without regard to its source is going to bite you in the ass when you're standing in the back of a poorly-lit alleyway wondering when the reception is going to start.
Likewise, making it trivial for you to use a self-signed cert for your own little website that you share with your friends makes it trivial for the other millions of servers out there to do the same.
Personally, I think my idea is a decent compromise between scary and usable, you can still see the page (so you can determine if it is the page you thought you were going to), a link would be provided explaining how you can determine if the certificate is "correct", and you can click a button to make the scary go away.
Warning! This cliff is known to the state of California to cause plummeting
It's not the cliff that kills you, it's the ground at the bottom of it. Be sure you put the warning sign in the right place, or you'll confuse everyone!
Let's say we're walking down the sidewalk and you see two people walking towards you.
Person 1: Average Joe, mid 20's, wearing t-shirt and jeans. Clean-shaven. Your assessment: Seems OK. Person 2: Guy wearing a cheap cop costume, waving around a gun. Your assessment: ??? ("Hmm, well, he's trying to look like a cop, so it must be ok!")
I'm not in favor of the way Firefox chooses to handle the situation (I think it's overkill) but "Ignore it and hope nothing bad happens!" is exactly how companies don't bother to discover encryption until after their really important laptop gets stolen. Personally, rather than going with the tiny little bar at the top (that looks exactly like every other little bar I get on every single website since I don't have flash installed), I think Firefox should show a solid red page with a heading indicating that it cannot verify the website below automatically, with a link to learn more about fingerprints and such, a button to say you trust this website (adds this cert for this domain to the list of trusted sites), and inside that page with a 20px margin, have the actual website load in what would effectively be an iframe, so you can see the website immediately, and you get a nice bright red border around the website, so you know that something is up, and that something is different than every other little warning you've gotten.
If it's only 25 sites (and not going to turn into "hundreds") then why play whack-a-mole? Set the default to Deny, look up those 25 IP addresses, and allow only 80 and 443 to those sites. That gets you 90% of the way there (the remaining 10% being virtualhosts on the same IPs). The rest of the IPs can be rewritten to a local webserver, which either is dedicated to this purpose or uses namebased virtual hosts to have it's own website, then the "default" vhost being the message you're putting up.
Make a simple script to add and remove IPs from the list and reload the rules, write down instructions on "What to do if www.foo.com stops working" or "What to do if you want to add www.baz.com", and you're done.
There are probably dozens of ways to actually implement this. Most of them will involve either custom wireless router firmware, or the wireless router plugged into a "real" router.
Jan 3, 2007 12:42:35 Qzukk killed a rat! Jan 3, 2007 12:42:37 Qzukk killed a rat! Jan 3, 2007 12:42:52 Qzukk killed a rat! Jan 3, 2007 12:42:53 Qzukk killed a rat! Jan 3, 2007 12:42:55 A rat killed Qzukk! Jan 3, 2007 12:44:23 Qzukk killed a rat! Jan 3, 2007 12:44:24 Qzukk killed a rat! Jan 3, 2007 12:44:24 Qzukk is now level 2! Jan 3, 2007 12:45:38 Qzukk killed a spider! Jan 3, 2007 12:45:52 Qzukk killed a spider!
Slashdot Mirror
YOUR PRECIOUS TIME
My time may be worth $80 an hour, but an hour of my indignation will run you $120.
FORCING companies to take on questionable creditors
The fuck? Even assuming that the CRA you cited was FORCING banks to make expensive high-interest subprime loans, which law was FORCING companies to buy mysterious voodoo credit derivatives that pretty much everyone acknowledges they didn't understand (which is how freddie and fannie sunk themselves, "subprime" is defined as a loan not meeting their purchase requirements, yet they were more than willing to pad out their assets with these worthless instruments)?
The fact is, if it had just been banks making subprime mortgages this would have been contained as just a small crisis. The world didn't move for Indie Mac, Ameribank or any of the other banks that overextended their credit and sunk, barely a tear was shed. No, the world shook and quaked for Bear Stearns and AIG and Fannie and Freddie and even the Reserve Primary Fund. For these investors in the make-believe, the purchasers of debt and derivatives and swaps, markets soared and collapsed, government opened taxpayers' wallets, and so on.
Cry all you want about whatever laws "democrats" and "republicans" pass or don't pass, the only government people I can find at fault here are the ones who opened the vault yet again, ensuring that we'll have yet another "crisis" in a few decades time.
Unless your name is "Superman", there's no real way to find exactly where wireless devices are, as far as I know.
So does the blue and red spandex underwear come with the radio signal triangulation gear, or do you have to pay extra?
That is the perfect example of "what the market will bear". Thanks.
You're welcome, oh, and my reply to you costs $500,000. Thanks for bearing the cost.
Some stains take more work to remove. Vegetable oil works wonders on getting oil-based paint off of tiles.
Grease and a bit of work should do you fine.
Turn off the "random content" slashboxes.
Only if your time is worth zero dollars.
Or the entertainment you receive from putting together your own toys is greater than the cost of your time, in which case you might even "profit".
shared spaces where 2D and 3D people can interact
So what do the 2D players see when the 3D players jump?
lets restrict all IT work to people who have the piece of paper
HR Departments do that just fine without needing a union.
My personal view of unions is that too often they cease to be a "voice" for the employers and just suck up money for the political ambitions of the "boss".
I suspect that the "techie" solution to this is to pass around a hat and hire a lawyer when it comes time to renegotiate a contract, rather than trying to create and fund an entire perpetual organization that is only needed once in a while.
Coaxing the state government in to suing him will just cost the tax payers extra money
Then maybe, just maybe, California should drop its claim of copyright, instead of suing him to hang on to their useless claim. What an amazing idea! He's not the "douchebag" here.
because it is affecting no one.
And you know this because everyone who it could possibly be affecting would be rich enough and willing to take the time to fight it in court?
Court battles aside, on the face of it, you're wrong. Everyone who has ever had to pay an architect (who in turn has to pay for the current building codes and therefore passes that charge on) has been affected, and that's just the start. Everyone who has hired a lawyer in California has paid to cover that lawyer's access to the law, and everyone who has ever paid for the law is directly affected.
I don't understand why you people are so interested in privacy when you are all carbon copies of each other.
And what about the people who aren't carbon copies of each other?
I installed Safari for Windows, it insisted on enforcing the Aqua look on everything (cue Mac fans insisting that this makes it look consistent... with OSX, it looks nothing like anything else on Windows).
It is great to test sites through a webkit browser though, Safari and Chrome both catch typos and screwups that render "right" in both IE and Firefox in "strict" mode (just now fixed one caused by a missing </label> that both IE and Firefox apparently "assumed" was there).
It would be nice if Safari obeyed !important background colors on input fields, I'd like to be able to visually indicate required fields so that an observant user can fill out the form correctly the first time, rather than requiring the user to submit the form to tell them they missed a spot (either through javascript and/or on the server).
(Any moment now...)
Hopefully soon, the "hype misfire" has caused all sorts of people to be spamming blogs with all sorts of links to God knows what as "secret chrome download here!"
obfuscates the fact that patents cover methods of implementation
Because you're wrong? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctrine_of_equivalents
There's nothing in any of the bills I send to Paytrust that would bother me if it became public knowledge.
Except for the utility bill itself, which in quite a few situations is accepted as "proof" that you live at the given address.
such an animal would have been "expensive" for using CPU resources
If you did it now, with modern "CPU resources" coming up with the less than 999,999,999 possible hashes would be trivial.
Ahhhhhhhh /. socialism.
Riiiight, because companies forcing everyone else to eat the costs of the damage they do isn't socialist at all. From each, according to their credit card #!
Data is key for a successful company
I never hear about a company having the laptop containing their inventory records getting stolen. Is that a function of nobody but the company caring, or do companies take better care of their "keys" than their customers'?
the certificate will not validate
This is being done because admins are crying that users have to jump through hoops to use their website when they use certificates that can't be validated.
Two friends send you an invitation and ask you to RSVP:
That's the thing. You have two friends, and 3 billion not-friends. Blindly accepting every invitation without regard to its source is going to bite you in the ass when you're standing in the back of a poorly-lit alleyway wondering when the reception is going to start.
Likewise, making it trivial for you to use a self-signed cert for your own little website that you share with your friends makes it trivial for the other millions of servers out there to do the same.
Personally, I think my idea is a decent compromise between scary and usable, you can still see the page (so you can determine if it is the page you thought you were going to), a link would be provided explaining how you can determine if the certificate is "correct", and you can click a button to make the scary go away.
Warning! This cliff is known to the state of California to cause plummeting
It's not the cliff that kills you, it's the ground at the bottom of it. Be sure you put the warning sign in the right place, or you'll confuse everyone!
Let's say we're walking down the sidewalk and you see two people walking towards you.
Person 1: Average Joe, mid 20's, wearing t-shirt and jeans. Clean-shaven. Your assessment: Seems OK.
Person 2: Guy wearing a cheap cop costume, waving around a gun. Your assessment: ??? ("Hmm, well, he's trying to look like a cop, so it must be ok!")
I'm not in favor of the way Firefox chooses to handle the situation (I think it's overkill) but "Ignore it and hope nothing bad happens!" is exactly how companies don't bother to discover encryption until after their really important laptop gets stolen. Personally, rather than going with the tiny little bar at the top (that looks exactly like every other little bar I get on every single website since I don't have flash installed), I think Firefox should show a solid red page with a heading indicating that it cannot verify the website below automatically, with a link to learn more about fingerprints and such, a button to say you trust this website (adds this cert for this domain to the list of trusted sites), and inside that page with a 20px margin, have the actual website load in what would effectively be an iframe, so you can see the website immediately, and you get a nice bright red border around the website, so you know that something is up, and that something is different than every other little warning you've gotten.
If it's only 25 sites (and not going to turn into "hundreds") then why play whack-a-mole? Set the default to Deny, look up those 25 IP addresses, and allow only 80 and 443 to those sites. That gets you 90% of the way there (the remaining 10% being virtualhosts on the same IPs). The rest of the IPs can be rewritten to a local webserver, which either is dedicated to this purpose or uses namebased virtual hosts to have it's own website, then the "default" vhost being the message you're putting up.
Make a simple script to add and remove IPs from the list and reload the rules, write down instructions on "What to do if www.foo.com stops working" or "What to do if you want to add www.baz.com", and you're done.
There are probably dozens of ways to actually implement this. Most of them will involve either custom wireless router firmware, or the wireless router plugged into a "real" router.
[ buvoxane vefitoke tegubuli powabaso sivakupe ]
Why is it suddenly raining blood?
Jan 3, 2007 12:42:35 Qzukk killed a rat!
Jan 3, 2007 12:42:37 Qzukk killed a rat!
Jan 3, 2007 12:42:52 Qzukk killed a rat!
Jan 3, 2007 12:42:53 Qzukk killed a rat!
Jan 3, 2007 12:42:55 A rat killed Qzukk!
Jan 3, 2007 12:44:23 Qzukk killed a rat!
Jan 3, 2007 12:44:24 Qzukk killed a rat!
Jan 3, 2007 12:44:24 Qzukk is now level 2!
Jan 3, 2007 12:45:38 Qzukk killed a spider!
Jan 3, 2007 12:45:52 Qzukk killed a spider!