I'd really like to understand why people think that Ron Paul would be any different than any other right wing republican out there.
And don't tell me about shrinking government. Both parties try and shrink government all the time, so long as it's the other party's government that's being shrunk.
The president is the president and responsibility ultimately rests with him.
If he hasn't gotten congress to do what he needs them to do then he needs to figure out ways to do so.
I voted for him and I'll vote for him again because the alternatives seem worse to me, but I don't like his apparent (and this is not a real quote) "Talk softly and carry a small stick" approach to things.
Just wait untill patriot act III which will take away more rights...this time of the states. It's not like recent US government has paid any attention to constitutional rights so far.
As a user I don't much care what you have to do. If you don't do it right, and in this case we're talking about keeping my confidential information secure, then you shouldn't publish the app.
Companies need to have two types of networks, one that connects to everything (ie Internet) with the normal security measures. One that connects to nothing outside the company in any way, and does not connect to the other network that connects to everything.
The internal network should host a minimum set of applications and databases that hold whatever is actually important to secure.
This doesn't do anything about CEOs who will sell company tech to boost their bonuses but it will make it more difficult for everyone else who wants to compromise proprietary information.
Sure you can always blame it on the poor sucker that bought what he was told.
And to answer your question - a LOT of people who COULD afford their homes before their crap flex interest rate loans went up lost their homes. Were they stupid to buy flex rate? Perhaps...but if you take into consideration that the interest rates wouldn't have gone through the roof if the financial system hadn't crashed due to various reasons which all seem to have, to some degree or another, corporate greed as their driving force. More people lost their jobs and couldn't make their normal payments. Banks charging 30% on credit cards (which used to be illegal) certainly didn't help.
People need a certain level of protection against those stronger than them which the government should be providing but isn't. So yes it's the governments' fault, and yes it sure as hell is the financial industries fault. In many cases no doubt it is also the fault of those who really couldn't afford their homes but for the vast majority I suspect that if there hadn't been a financial meltdown and economic depression they would have been able to afford their homes just fine and so no, I don't blame them.
Yes, occasionally you'll find a sad story wherever you look, but a vast majority of homeless people are homeless people because they fucked up their shit.
And your source of statistics of 'vast majority of homeless people' would be what exactly?
Have you forgotten that this is the worst economic situation since the great depression or would you say that the homeless in the great depression also fucked up their shit?
How many people lost their homes because of the bank caused financial crisis?
You're a jackass if you blame this on the people whose lives got fucked up not because of their own actions but because the financial industry fucked up.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd really like to understand why people think that Ron Paul would be any different than any other right wing republican out there.
And don't tell me about shrinking government. Both parties try and shrink government all the time, so long as it's the other party's government that's being shrunk.
The president is the president and responsibility ultimately rests with him.
If he hasn't gotten congress to do what he needs them to do then he needs to figure out ways to do so.
I voted for him and I'll vote for him again because the alternatives seem worse to me, but I don't like his apparent (and this is not a real quote) "Talk softly and carry a small stick" approach to things.
Just wait untill patriot act III which will take away more rights...this time of the states. It's not like recent US government has paid any attention to constitutional rights so far.
The link posted is no longer available and I don't see anything else in the news about it. Any other sources?
IANAL but none of that sounds like 'proof' to me.
Why make it complicated? A good rifle should take it out just fine....
Not necessarily as there are a lot of tech stock owners that might be of a different mind than a profit oriented CEO / board.
As a user I don't much care what you have to do. If you don't do it right, and in this case we're talking about keeping my confidential information secure, then you shouldn't publish the app.
Evernote has encryption:
https://support.evernote.com/link/portal/16051/16058/Article/549/Overview-of-Encryption-in-Evernote
Of course then you have to decide if you trust them. Personally I use PGP to encrypt before I sync.
"Nowhere else in America are you guilty till proven innocent and due process does not exist."
I think you're remembering yesterday's America, before the Patriot Act.
Companies need to have two types of networks, one that connects to everything (ie Internet) with the normal security measures. One that connects to nothing outside the company in any way, and does not connect to the other network that connects to everything.
The internal network should host a minimum set of applications and databases that hold whatever is actually important to secure.
This doesn't do anything about CEOs who will sell company tech to boost their bonuses but it will make it more difficult for everyone else who wants to compromise proprietary information.
Sounds like a boot camp CCIE to me, with little to no actual experience.
The problem are boot camps. You can get CCIEs (don't know about OCMs) with a number who have passed the lab that don't know shit about networks.
"What you need instead is a hidden volume."
What you need is a government that supports your rights instead of violating and removing them.
FTFY.
Buyer beware?
Sure you can always blame it on the poor sucker that bought what he was told.
And to answer your question - a LOT of people who COULD afford their homes before their crap flex interest rate loans went up lost their homes. Were they stupid to buy flex rate? Perhaps...but if you take into consideration that the interest rates wouldn't have gone through the roof if the financial system hadn't crashed due to various reasons which all seem to have, to some degree or another, corporate greed as their driving force. More people lost their jobs and couldn't make their normal payments. Banks charging 30% on credit cards (which used to be illegal) certainly didn't help.
People need a certain level of protection against those stronger than them which the government should be providing but isn't. So yes it's the governments' fault, and yes it sure as hell is the financial industries fault. In many cases no doubt it is also the fault of those who really couldn't afford their homes but for the vast majority I suspect that if there hadn't been a financial meltdown and economic depression they would have been able to afford their homes just fine and so no, I don't blame them.
Yes, occasionally you'll find a sad story wherever you look, but a vast majority of homeless people are homeless people because they fucked up their shit.
And your source of statistics of 'vast majority of homeless people' would be what exactly?
Have you forgotten that this is the worst economic situation since the great depression or would you say that the homeless in the great depression also fucked up their shit?
How many people lost their homes because of the bank caused financial crisis?
You're a jackass if you blame this on the people whose lives got fucked up not because of their own actions but because the financial industry fucked up.
US courts tend to be far more patriotic, in protecting US corporations and their interests
FTFY
Sounds illegal but what the hell...give me augmented reality over real reality any day!
The lock on the cockpit is part of it, sure.
My point wasn't about specific precautions more of an overall statement that it has nothing to do with protecting Joe Public.
Yes well, that was what I was inferring...
Gimme some of whatever you're smoking cause it must be good stuff...
Sorry I think that's a bit too paranoid. They're there to protect those who make the rules, nothing more than that.
I didn't say that they were competent. The point remains that they are not there for us. They are there to protect the 1%.
Can do this today without DNSSEC...
You mean wear the party uniform and give the party signal to avoid problems for yourself?
Sounds familiar.