I don't feel any safer, I just feel completely annoyed. Annoyed that just because the Blue Angels are in the air, I can't be processed through security; annoyed that the TSA agent telling me to take my ID out of my wallet ("I forgot, ever forget? Happened to me" ~Ron White) can't say please, or at least not have an attitude, not slouch etc.; annoyed that security gates are too often, although not always, understaffed for the amount of traffic passing through them. Honestly I think I felt safer when you could walk down to the terminal and sit with you family while you waited for the plane. Lastly, the TSA seems to have never realized, they are in a service industry are we are not an imposition to their day, we are the reason for their day.
Based on the segment on the TV news last night, it doesn't appear that the lights are intended to be used as in the photo in the article. I'd guess that display and photo are to showcase the range of colors that can be displayed. The TV news segment alluded to the lighting colors being used to make the passengers calm and comfortable especially on long flights. The lighting would be changed gradually during the course of the flight. The psychological effects of color have been researched for sometime, it's interesting to seem that research put to another practical use.
AC, I think you missed my point. I was referring to the fact that it is possible for someone seeking an education degree to get a horrible review during their 'student teaching' experience and still graduate with a degree in education. I'd argue that anyone that cannot successfully complete a stint as a student teacher should NOT be granted a degree in education or at least not one that allows them to teach students.
Also teachers do have to know the subject material they are teaching. I have seen too many teachers in the elementary grades that are afraid of math, for example, and as a result don't teach it setting their students up for future failure.
While finding a way to quantify what makes someone a good teacher is all well and good, IMHO it's looking at a symptom and not what, at least what I consider, one of true challenges (problems) in education... That being which persons should and should not get a degree in education. It's stunning how many people think teaching is easy and teaching younger kids is easier. There are too many cases of hey I flunked "insert course here" I'm gonna major in education.
For one, student teaching needs to occur much earlier in the program and a down-check from a qualified evaluating teacher should result in your being dropped from the program, similar to having to pass your core classes in most majors with a B or above.
In short, it's rather pointless to evaluate teachers and hold them accountable when there simply is no one to replace them with.
It's a bit stunning that they're fluffing this off as strictly an FTC issue. We started encrypting our backups due to HIPPA many years ago and started using Iron Mountain for offsite storage a few years ago. If a company of less than 200 employees can manage this, I'd wager SAIC could pull it off too. LOSING
That depends on how fine the resolution is and how you define 'slightly'. I'd guess (in a totally unscientific manner) your sweet spot would be at least a 1-2 meter diameter sphere. The problem becomes more interesting if you are a moving target.
if you were to improve it I don't see why keeping them in a special prison is a bad thing.
It might be a good thing, it might not. I was just commenting on how what is currently being done under existing (somewhat contradictory) laws isn't right.
you knew a person would exit jail and go murder someone why would you let them out of jail?
If you knew and had laws to support it, it makes sense not to let them out. The problem is unless Youree Dell Harris a.k.a. Miss Cleo or someone else is the Real Deal(tm) the problem is you can't know. You can suspect, believe, have an overwhelming statistic probability but, you can't know.
I don't really understand why people like this aren't kept in prison. If they have a high chance of committing another crime
In short simply because it's wrong. Our system of justice (lets not go into it's flaws at the moment) is basically crime -> conviction -> incarceration -> parole (maybe) -> freedom. You can't lock someone up based on what they _might_ do. That's the way the system is supposed to work, criminals are supposed to rehabilitated but, most of us know (believe) it really doesn't work that way.
If you divided "sex-offenders" into two groups 1) those with predilections to a certain behavior (sociopaths, pedophiles, etc) and 2) those who are not. Granted I'm not certain such a line can even be drawn. Case #2 seems simple, incarceration therapy, follow-up should in general lead to a low recidivism rate.
Case #1 is a sticky wicket. Right now, we are pretty much stomping all over their civil rights by treating those 'criminals' the way we do. It's too easy to get the public to support draconian measures that shouldn't pass Constitutional muster (Don't get me wrong, I'd like to choke the bastards with my own hands too but, that's not the point). The other option is to not treat them as criminals but, as someone with an incurable mental disease or defect and institutionalize them. Then the problems becomes, in many states, if there is no chance for a cure (many agree there isn't) you can't commit them unless they are a danger to themselves and society. Legally, most of them don't rise to that level.
I wish I had the answer, I could write a book, do the talk-show circuit and retire for life on a private island.
I'd bet a pretty penny that everyone (okay maybe just nearly everyone) in that area has been told what will happen in the event of a fire if you haven't paid your fee and/or knows a story of this happening. Our local fire company was quite blunt about it, no pay no play. While I feel for the guy and his family, I seriously doubt he had a reasonable expectation he would be protected if his home caught fire.
In a small town we used to live in if you didn't have your sticker (they put a sticker in your window each year if you paid), the fire department would roll out and keep the fire from spreading if there were covered houses near by.
It comes down to the definition of Life. While Hawking seems to find value and fulfillment in his life and endeavors other may define what Hawking calls Life as a 'fate worse than death'.
It doesn't bloody matter whether he got into a system where the password was "password" or one where the password was "HD84^$#jdu7^$nhdge". It's a crime and if convicted he's a criminal.
While in some cases I do agree that filtering approaches silly and maybe even stupid, I think the statement is a bit broad. Unless of course it means Peacefire is intended to get around only 'stupid' filters and that not all filters are stupid. This is off-topic but, I just couldn't let this one go. Just so It's obvious I would disagree that all filters or filtering is 'stupid'.
Companies and Schools have obligations to be met, lawsuits to prevent. Don't forget this is America and we are more than a bit litigious. Parents also have a right, yes I said a right to monitor and control their children's activities.
In those cases their are legal, moral and other issues to be considered that are complex and warrant discussion in another venue. I just take exception to what appears to be a blanket statement.
For reasons beyond my ken, schools tend to deal with matters internally in lieu of using the courts where legal action could be taken. Granted the courts, IMHO tend to be much too lenient on youthful offenders. This is not parody, defamation of character, possibly criminally negligence, libel, etc. could all apply.
I don't believe the school has overstepped its bounds or authority by suspending the students, they could have been prosecuted. The school may have done them a favor.
The students don't need to 'just' be talked to about hurting someones feelings, they need to be punished, they need to learn to think before they act and that their actions have, sometimes severe, consequences.
Should have been more specific. Granted prices on tech drop as overall manufacturing costs drop, new more efficient (read fewer defects and less waste) processes have been adopted, etc... So, yes in terms of a blanket statement it would be false.
The intent was to state, and I'm open to being shown evidence to the contrary, that I have never seen a company's offshore move and resultant reduced operating costs directly result in lower prices. The market bears current pricing until such time that a manufacturer's competitors make similar changes and a price war begins.
On a strategic level, the USA really screwed the pooch by chasing the lowest bidder and not building up our domestic capacity to produce these items.
It goes much deeper than that, too many Americans are overly litigiousness, not at fault and to desperately seek the almighty dollar. Corporations have gone off shore to seek lower cost materials and labor in pursuit of higher profits. You'll note nothing seems to get cheaper to the end user.
Sadly at this point in the game, what other options are there?
And for you small gov't types, this is an example of free market principles colliding with what is effectively a national security issue.
Free Market, pah. As the guy at the end of the supply chain, of mega-corporations, multi-nationals, world-wide supply chains and so on, I don't see the Free Market benefiting me. Profits are sought, exclusive agreements are penned and now it's nearly impossible to find American made electronics or even get a 1/2 gallon of ice cream at you local grocery.
He may not be but, I certainly am. My mommy told me so.
The question of best practices doesn't matter who's important.
Yes and No.
Not all best practices are created equal. A general best practice may be different from one for finance, defense or <insert your industry here>.
Case in point: If he worked for us it wouldn't be an issue, we require the use of VPN and don't allow remote users to SSH in. When on VPN, we redirect all traffic over the VPN essentially removing the user from their local network.
With SSH user like to use port forwarding. We had a user get around our attempts to prevent forward of SMTP. Essentially his innovative port forwarding configuration allowed him to bridge the network, he got botted and our lives became seriously un-fun(tm). In short, while the stated question is interesting, it pales in comparison to other risks.
Most people are missing the point. What we're witnessing is the buggy whips in the age of automobiles transition.
Think you've got something there but, there are other issues as well. Along with the general decline in circulation in print media there is a disturbing trend toward the reduction or elimination of reporting staff at both print media and other news organizations.
While your general run-of-the-mill, news of the day and local happenings, seem to be healthy enough. In depth, investigative and international reports have suffered greatly. It's truly distressing when I hear more about what is going on nationally from the BBC than I do from ABC, CBS or NBC.
While news (print, digital, etc.) is a market and is marketed, where does it end. Are we doomed to a world full of crop and shrink sound bites, or is something better on the horizon?
Slashdot Mirror
I don't feel any safer, I just feel completely annoyed. Annoyed that just because the Blue Angels are in the air, I can't be processed through security; annoyed that the TSA agent telling me to take my ID out of my wallet ("I forgot, ever forget? Happened to me" ~Ron White) can't say please, or at least not have an attitude, not slouch etc.; annoyed that security gates are too often, although not always, understaffed for the amount of traffic passing through them. Honestly I think I felt safer when you could walk down to the terminal and sit with you family while you waited for the plane. Lastly, the TSA seems to have never realized, they are in a service industry are we are not an imposition to their day, we are the reason for their day.
Based on the segment on the TV news last night, it doesn't appear that the lights are intended to be used as in the photo in the article. I'd guess that display and photo are to showcase the range of colors that can be displayed. The TV news segment alluded to the lighting colors being used to make the passengers calm and comfortable especially on long flights. The lighting would be changed gradually during the course of the flight. The psychological effects of color have been researched for sometime, it's interesting to seem that research put to another practical use.
AC, I think you missed my point. I was referring to the fact that it is possible for someone seeking an education degree to get a horrible review during their 'student teaching' experience and still graduate with a degree in education. I'd argue that anyone that cannot successfully complete a stint as a student teacher should NOT be granted a degree in education or at least not one that allows them to teach students.
Also teachers do have to know the subject material they are teaching. I have seen too many teachers in the elementary grades that are afraid of math, for example, and as a result don't teach it setting their students up for future failure.
While finding a way to quantify what makes someone a good teacher is all well and good, IMHO it's looking at a symptom and not what, at least what I consider, one of true challenges (problems) in education... That being which persons should and should not get a degree in education. It's stunning how many people think teaching is easy and teaching younger kids is easier. There are too many cases of hey I flunked "insert course here" I'm gonna major in education.
For one, student teaching needs to occur much earlier in the program and a down-check from a qualified evaluating teacher should result in your being dropped from the program, similar to having to pass your core classes in most majors with a B or above.
In short, it's rather pointless to evaluate teachers and hold them accountable when there simply is no one to replace them with.
It's a bit stunning that they're fluffing this off as strictly an FTC issue. We started encrypting our backups due to HIPPA many years ago and started using Iron Mountain for offsite storage a few years ago. If a company of less than 200 employees can manage this, I'd wager SAIC could pull it off too. LOSING
That depends on how fine the resolution is and how you define 'slightly'. I'd guess (in a totally unscientific manner) your sweet spot would be at least a 1-2 meter diameter sphere. The problem becomes more interesting if you are a moving target.
if you were to improve it I don't see why keeping them in a special prison is a bad thing.
It might be a good thing, it might not. I was just commenting on how what is currently being done under existing (somewhat contradictory) laws isn't right.
you knew a person would exit jail and go murder someone why would you let them out of jail?
If you knew and had laws to support it, it makes sense not to let them out. The problem is unless Youree Dell Harris a.k.a. Miss Cleo or someone else is the Real Deal(tm) the problem is you can't know. You can suspect, believe, have an overwhelming statistic probability but, you can't know.
I don't really understand why people like this aren't kept in prison. If they have a high chance of committing another crime
In short simply because it's wrong. Our system of justice (lets not go into it's flaws at the moment) is basically crime -> conviction -> incarceration -> parole (maybe) -> freedom. You can't lock someone up based on what they _might_ do. That's the way the system is supposed to work, criminals are supposed to rehabilitated but, most of us know (believe) it really doesn't work that way.
If you divided "sex-offenders" into two groups 1) those with predilections to a certain behavior (sociopaths, pedophiles, etc) and 2) those who are not. Granted I'm not certain such a line can even be drawn. Case #2 seems simple, incarceration therapy, follow-up should in general lead to a low recidivism rate.
Case #1 is a sticky wicket. Right now, we are pretty much stomping all over their civil rights by treating those 'criminals' the way we do. It's too easy to get the public to support draconian measures that shouldn't pass Constitutional muster (Don't get me wrong, I'd like to choke the bastards with my own hands too but, that's not the point). The other option is to not treat them as criminals but, as someone with an incurable mental disease or defect and institutionalize them. Then the problems becomes, in many states, if there is no chance for a cure (many agree there isn't) you can't commit them unless they are a danger to themselves and society. Legally, most of them don't rise to that level.
I wish I had the answer, I could write a book, do the talk-show circuit and retire for life on a private island.
Was thinking "Trash Foils Man's Suicide Attempt" would be a more accurate headline. I doubt, at the time, he considered himself saved.
I'd bet a pretty penny that everyone (okay maybe just nearly everyone) in that area has been told what will happen in the event of a fire if you haven't paid your fee and/or knows a story of this happening. Our local fire company was quite blunt about it, no pay no play. While I feel for the guy and his family, I seriously doubt he had a reasonable expectation he would be protected if his home caught fire.
In a small town we used to live in if you didn't have your sticker (they put a sticker in your window each year if you paid), the fire department would roll out and keep the fire from spreading if there were covered houses near by.
It comes down to the definition of Life. While Hawking seems to find value and fulfillment in his life and endeavors other may define what Hawking calls Life as a 'fate worse than death'.
It also has to be vastly different to be diagnosed at 21 http://neurologicalillness.suite101.com/article.cfm/dr_stephen_hawking_and_als than at 35 - 55 as commonly occurs.
Maybe NY is saying 'after your dead they're no longer your organs'.
It doesn't bloody matter whether he got into a system where the password was "password" or one where the password was "HD84^$#jdu7^$nhdge". It's a crime and if convicted he's a criminal.
While in some cases I do agree that filtering approaches silly and maybe even stupid, I think the statement is a bit broad. Unless of course it means Peacefire is intended to get around only 'stupid' filters and that not all filters are stupid. This is off-topic but, I just couldn't let this one go. Just so It's obvious I would disagree that all filters or filtering is 'stupid'.
Companies and Schools have obligations to be met, lawsuits to prevent. Don't forget this is America and we are more than a bit litigious. Parents also have a right, yes I said a right to monitor and control their children's activities.
In those cases their are legal, moral and other issues to be considered that are complex and warrant discussion in another venue. I just take exception to what appears to be a blanket statement.
The alternative is landfill.
Of course you meant to say recycle it.
For reasons beyond my ken, schools tend to deal with matters internally in lieu of using the courts where legal action could be taken. Granted the courts, IMHO tend to be much too lenient on youthful offenders. This is not parody, defamation of character, possibly criminally negligence, libel, etc. could all apply.
I don't believe the school has overstepped its bounds or authority by suspending the students, they could have been prosecuted. The school may have done them a favor.
The students don't need to 'just' be talked to about hurting someones feelings, they need to be punished, they need to learn to think before they act and that their actions have, sometimes severe, consequences.
Should have been more specific. Granted prices on tech drop as overall manufacturing costs drop, new more efficient (read fewer defects and less waste) processes have been adopted, etc... So, yes in terms of a blanket statement it would be false.
The intent was to state, and I'm open to being shown evidence to the contrary, that I have never seen a company's offshore move and resultant reduced operating costs directly result in lower prices. The market bears current pricing until such time that a manufacturer's competitors make similar changes and a price war begins.
On a strategic level, the USA really screwed the pooch by chasing the lowest bidder and not building up our domestic capacity to produce these items.
It goes much deeper than that, too many Americans are overly litigiousness, not at fault and to desperately seek the almighty dollar. Corporations have gone off shore to seek lower cost materials and labor in pursuit of higher profits. You'll note nothing seems to get cheaper to the end user.
Sadly at this point in the game, what other options are there?
And for you small gov't types, this is an example of free market principles colliding with what is effectively a national security issue.
Free Market, pah. As the guy at the end of the supply chain, of mega-corporations, multi-nationals, world-wide supply chains and so on, I don't see the Free Market benefiting me. Profits are sought, exclusive agreements are penned and now it's nearly impossible to find American made electronics or even get a 1/2 gallon of ice cream at you local grocery.
You're probably not that special..
He may not be but, I certainly am. My mommy told me so.
The question of best practices doesn't matter who's important.
Yes and No.
Not all best practices are created equal. A general best practice may be different from one for finance, defense or <insert your industry here>.
Case in point: If he worked for us it wouldn't be an issue, we require the use of VPN and don't allow remote users to SSH in. When on VPN, we redirect all traffic over the VPN essentially removing the user from their local network.
With SSH user like to use port forwarding. We had a user get around our attempts to prevent forward of SMTP. Essentially his innovative port forwarding configuration allowed him to bridge the network, he got botted and our lives became seriously un-fun(tm). In short, while the stated question is interesting, it pales in comparison to other risks.
First, let's hope it's a reason and not an excuse...
Second, Security through obscurity is no security at all or No security through obscurity.
More like you fell in...
(Well, like exley said...)
Most people are missing the point. What we're witnessing is the buggy whips in the age of automobiles transition.
Think you've got something there but, there are other issues as well. Along with the general decline in circulation in print media there is a disturbing trend toward the reduction or elimination of reporting staff at both print media and other news organizations.
While your general run-of-the-mill, news of the day and local happenings, seem to be healthy enough. In depth, investigative and international reports have suffered greatly. It's truly distressing when I hear more about what is going on nationally from the BBC than I do from ABC, CBS or NBC.
While news (print, digital, etc.) is a market and is marketed, where does it end. Are we doomed to a world full of crop and shrink sound bites, or is something better on the horizon?
Bah interruptions...
Anywho... The why, at least for some of us, is a desire not to pay hefty fines and have our freedom impinged uponw.
Why bother with something that tries to implement windows API's when you can have the real thing with no effort at all?