I donÃ(TM)t know the answer to how we fix it, but I do know that the attack on the second amendment makes taking the rest of our rights away easier for them.
Not really. When have 2nd amendment proponents ever done anything to protect people's privacy rights? I don't see them protesting data collection or the right to free thought, and certainly not using their weapons against any oppressor. If anything, it appears to be the 2nd amendment riders who want panopticon state, with suppression of views and freedoms they don't like. Show me a gun liberty group that will pick up their weapons and stand up for rights of people like homosexuals, atheists or ethnic minorities...
So the US is becoming China-lite now? How soon before we get our own Great Firewall, too?
Oh, I'm sure that isn't far off. The stable genius just has to figure out which country he is going to get to pay for it.
But we're really not that far behind as it is. The data collection that's done on citizens, residents and foreigners in the US is probably not much smaller than what's done in China. Companies like Google and Facebook make it much easier to correlate all the data.
... because he might be upset at the prospect of losing!
Someone needs to remind the Brits that if Love didn't want to do the time, he shouldn't have done the crime.
The exact same "reasoning" can be used on Americans and why they should be subject to other countries' laws.
So you're okay with free extradition to other countries, including extraditing Americans who write Nazi apologism or symbols, make drawings of Mohammed, flirt with a married person online, or create a web site allowing people to anonymously poke fun at royalty?
If you want US laws to reach the rest of the world, but Americans to be shielded from other countries' laws, you're either irrational or a bigot. Earlier, when USA was the only real superpower in the Western world, they could get away with that crap. But Rome is falling. The rest of the world don't kowtow to an empire that once was, led by someone who makes Caligula look sane.
If you're paid a salary, you are almost certainly not compensated for your overtime. Any hours you put past your 40 hour obligation, is free labor as far as the shareholders are concerned.
With "real" salaried positions (i.e. not the unscrupulous use of "salaried" to get around overtime laws that many companies do), it's not about hours at all. Hours doesn't come into it. You're paid to do a job, not the number of work hours you spend to do it. Some weeks I can do my job in less time than most regularly paid workers, and if I feel like it, take on other work too. And if I don't, and don't care about a potential pay raise, I can go fish instead. Other weeks, I work more time than most regularly paid workers. But again, it's not about time. My time is mine, but I have an obligation to do my job. Some of it must be done during "business hours" when there's a support apparatus of other workers present, but it's really not about counting the hours.
It looks like you have a problem detaching yourself from thinking of hours as the measurement for work. Sometimes time is not measured at all - the end result is.
Ah, you're on wages. If you ever become salaried, you'll find out that this isn't how it works for better paying positions. If a client four time zones away calls and need help, I'm not going to jeopardize a big contract and not just my own job but others' too, including those on wages, by declining to take the call. I'm compensated extra for the willingness to do what it takes, whether it's during office hours or not. They pay for me doing my job, not my hours. That also means that if I need to do something, and there's not any pressing matters at work, I simply walk out and do it, without holding my hat in my hand asking a big boss. They get more than enough of my work, and my salary and bonuses reflect this.
Netflix has probably done more good than harm in reducing "unauthorized viewing" than any anti-piracy group.. But even their content disappears over time.
More so than ever. Netflix has less than half the number of shows and movies of what it did a few years ago. If you can't find it on Netflix, can't find it on Hulu, can't find it on Amazon Prime, and it's not in the stores, the way to piracy is not long.
Especially BBC content is very tempting to pirate for us in the US, because BBC America either doesn't provide the content at all, or it's seriously abridged and censored, and BBC UK refuses to sell to US customers and directs them to BBC America. In those cases, it's not hard to see someone buying or renting the bowdlerized version, and then downloading the real version from a pirate site. Legally, they may be in the wrong, but morally?
Look at statistics. Punishment does not act as a deterrent above a certain low level. A would-be offender won't stop and think "oh, if I get caught, I will get ten years in a bad prison instead of five years in a good prison, so I won't do the act after all". The punishment in the US system isn't designed to be a deterrent to reduce crime, it's designed to be revenge to cater to the baser instincts of the unwashed masses.
And yet they corrected that problem anyway. You don't get emails from the Taxation Office anymore. Or rather they moved it. The only correspondence you should get now are via messages posted to you online through the my.gov portal.
Wot, an arm of the Australian government has hacked my.gov to use it for communicating with their citizens?
Simply declaring such a responsibility, whether rightfully or not, doesn't improve security an inch. That would be magical thinking.
True. Merit for those who do well, and demerit and eventually replacement for those who don't, on the other hand, should work.
employers have to make sure that they get proper training
The problem is not with knowledge, it is with attitude and aptitude. There are people who will never act in safe manners, no matter how much training they receive are hired by people who don't care.
I have held computer security classes, and generally, they only help those who have an interest. People who are trusting, gullible or greedy by nature won't change due to mere knowledge transfer. They will always be a vector of attack, and no matter what safeguards are put into place, as long as people are allowed to communicate, the weak human links will be exploited. The only recourse I see is to avoid hiring weak links, and get them out before they break.
The only real editing problem I saw with this article was the mistranslation of Ståle as Stale. Å is a letter, and not an accent or umlaut, and the correct way of translating å to a character set that lacks it is "aa". I.e. his name transliterated to English should be Staale.
Some old apps would automatically load html-linked images, but if that is still a problem, it is not the user's fault.
If it's configurable, in a way that A Reasonable Person would understand how to, they get some blame too. It's not like if IT doesn't do their job, that absolves workers. Security is something that needs to be thought about by everyone, from janitor to CFO.
These are state employees, so firing them for incompetence is not an option.
Not hiring gullible people might, though. People leaving might be slow, but certain. And if bonuses to those who don't fall for such things might help speed attrition.
Michigan has been the home of communism since Henry Ford died.
Back in the days when communists were red and conservatives were blue, i.e. before a TV channel employee got the two mixed up in a poll presentation and the wrong colours stuck in the minds of largely ignorant Americans.
Sending out training and multiple rounds of phishing test emails (which then require more training if you click) is the ONLY way to bring this number down.
No, firing and hiring people with a healthier level of suspicion should work too. Testing gullibility should be part of applicant screening. If the applicant has given an e-mail address, that's one way of testing. During job interviews is another. Bonuses for those who never fall for phishing could also be a good idea, helping retain those who Get It.
That said, dinging people for "opening" an e-mail is probably not correct. Looking at the e-mail context as plain text is harmless. There's a huge difference between someone using a default web browser as a mail client and someone using a restricted viewer/previewer that neither runs scripts, fetches anything, nor expands embedded content.
But these arguments are not in favor of vim, they're in favor of the vi family. I much prefer nvi over vim, not the least due to file locking, and also because undo/redo also works on undo/redo like in vi, while vim has this changed. In vi/nvi, you can hit u u and toggle between undo or not. Also, vim lacks the open mode of vi.
But I'm sure that votes came in for vim because that's the only flavor of vi the the voters knew about. Much like the WTF of more people voting for Chrome over Chromium. Did they actually know the differences, and voted due to that, or did they vote on the only thing they knew?
Addiction rates go way DOWN. Without criminal penalty, more people seek treatment.
More is needed than that. With so many states being right-to-fire states, I suspect that many people do all they can to hide their addiction, so they don't lose their job. Becoming unemployed is likely more of a problem for someone who has an expensive addiction and cannot afford CORBA, cannot afford to pay for rehab, and has no chance of passing a drug screening test to land a new job until the addiction is beaten. In other countries, social stigma and shame are bigger problems, but here in the US, the economical impact is likely the biggest hurdle.
I can check the time on my watch using only the hand it is on.
No, you can't. You either have to move your hand in a sweeping motion, or tap the screen, otherwise it doesn't display the time. I.e. if you have something in your hands, you cannot tell the time.
Exactly how do you read your watch in the dark?
Who said anything about in the dark? In bed does not equate to in the dark. Especially early in the morning when you wonder whether you can sleep for a little longer, or if you live up North and it really doesn't get dark at all during summer. But even when it is dark, many if not most analogue watches have luminescent hands and markings.
Why? It won't make any difference to you whatsoever. The only reason to do so would be to make others happy enough that you benefit more now than the headaches of doing it.
Sure, but don't tell that to anyone who had major surgery like back surgery or had their wisdom teeth yanked out. You simply can't adapt to that.
Sure you can. People had teeth pulled (even canines, which is a hell of a lot more painful than wisdom teeth), bones broken and passed kidney stones long before there were pain killers. And women give birth without medication even today. In short, we're sissies due to our culture, unable to grin and bear it. We fear pain almost as much as we fear death.
Adrian Lamo extended that faith to the government. He had faith that the people in government offices were true to their oaths, and he had faith that eventually a proper justice would be served. He had faith that talking to the authorities would lead to a righteous outcome.
Or he was a narc because that was a condition of his lenient sentencing, and he chose to take it.
Slashdot Mirror
I donÃ(TM)t know the answer to how we fix it, but I do know that the attack on the second amendment makes taking the rest of our rights away easier for them.
Not really. When have 2nd amendment proponents ever done anything to protect people's privacy rights? I don't see them protesting data collection or the right to free thought, and certainly not using their weapons against any oppressor.
If anything, it appears to be the 2nd amendment riders who want panopticon state, with suppression of views and freedoms they don't like. Show me a gun liberty group that will pick up their weapons and stand up for rights of people like homosexuals, atheists or ethnic minorities...
So the US is becoming China-lite now? How soon before we get our own Great Firewall, too?
Oh, I'm sure that isn't far off. The stable genius just has to figure out which country he is going to get to pay for it.
But we're really not that far behind as it is. The data collection that's done on citizens, residents and foreigners in the US is probably not much smaller than what's done in China. Companies like Google and Facebook make it much easier to correlate all the data.
... because he might be upset at the prospect of losing!
Someone needs to remind the Brits that if Love didn't want to do the time, he shouldn't have done the crime.
The exact same "reasoning" can be used on Americans and why they should be subject to other countries' laws.
So you're okay with free extradition to other countries, including extraditing Americans who write Nazi apologism or symbols, make drawings of Mohammed, flirt with a married person online, or create a web site allowing people to anonymously poke fun at royalty?
If you want US laws to reach the rest of the world, but Americans to be shielded from other countries' laws, you're either irrational or a bigot. Earlier, when USA was the only real superpower in the Western world, they could get away with that crap. But Rome is falling. The rest of the world don't kowtow to an empire that once was, led by someone who makes Caligula look sane.
If you're paid a salary, you are almost certainly not compensated for your overtime. Any hours you put past your 40 hour obligation, is free labor as far as the shareholders are concerned.
With "real" salaried positions (i.e. not the unscrupulous use of "salaried" to get around overtime laws that many companies do), it's not about hours at all. Hours doesn't come into it. You're paid to do a job, not the number of work hours you spend to do it.
Some weeks I can do my job in less time than most regularly paid workers, and if I feel like it, take on other work too. And if I don't, and don't care about a potential pay raise, I can go fish instead. Other weeks, I work more time than most regularly paid workers. But again, it's not about time. My time is mine, but I have an obligation to do my job. Some of it must be done during "business hours" when there's a support apparatus of other workers present, but it's really not about counting the hours.
It looks like you have a problem detaching yourself from thinking of hours as the measurement for work. Sometimes time is not measured at all - the end result is.
The company pays me for the hours I work
Ah, you're on wages. If you ever become salaried, you'll find out that this isn't how it works for better paying positions.
If a client four time zones away calls and need help, I'm not going to jeopardize a big contract and not just my own job but others' too, including those on wages, by declining to take the call.
I'm compensated extra for the willingness to do what it takes, whether it's during office hours or not. They pay for me doing my job, not my hours. That also means that if I need to do something, and there's not any pressing matters at work, I simply walk out and do it, without holding my hat in my hand asking a big boss. They get more than enough of my work, and my salary and bonuses reflect this.
Netflix has probably done more good than harm in reducing "unauthorized viewing" than any anti-piracy group.. But even their content disappears over time.
More so than ever. Netflix has less than half the number of shows and movies of what it did a few years ago.
If you can't find it on Netflix, can't find it on Hulu, can't find it on Amazon Prime, and it's not in the stores, the way to piracy is not long.
Especially BBC content is very tempting to pirate for us in the US, because BBC America either doesn't provide the content at all, or it's seriously abridged and censored, and BBC UK refuses to sell to US customers and directs them to BBC America.
In those cases, it's not hard to see someone buying or renting the bowdlerized version, and then downloading the real version from a pirate site. Legally, they may be in the wrong, but morally?
Look at statistics. Punishment does not act as a deterrent above a certain low level. A would-be offender won't stop and think "oh, if I get caught, I will get ten years in a bad prison instead of five years in a good prison, so I won't do the act after all".
The punishment in the US system isn't designed to be a deterrent to reduce crime, it's designed to be revenge to cater to the baser instincts of the unwashed masses.
... and you're repeating yourself why?
Because you do?
my.gov.au != my.gov, and my.gov is what you said. Twice.
My.gov is the official communications portal for government services including tax.
I repeat: The GP is in Australia.
And yet they corrected that problem anyway. You don't get emails from the Taxation Office anymore. Or rather they moved it. The only correspondence you should get now are via messages posted to you online through the my.gov portal.
Wot, an arm of the Australian government has hacked my.gov to use it for communicating with their citizens?
Simply declaring such a responsibility, whether rightfully or not, doesn't improve security an inch. That would be magical thinking.
True. Merit for those who do well, and demerit and eventually replacement for those who don't, on the other hand, should work.
employers have to make sure that they get proper training
The problem is not with knowledge, it is with attitude and aptitude. There are people who will never act in safe manners, no matter how much training they receive are hired by people who don't care.
I have held computer security classes, and generally, they only help those who have an interest. People who are trusting, gullible or greedy by nature won't change due to mere knowledge transfer. They will always be a vector of attack, and no matter what safeguards are put into place, as long as people are allowed to communicate, the weak human links will be exploited.
The only recourse I see is to avoid hiring weak links, and get them out before they break.
The only real editing problem I saw with this article was the mistranslation of Ståle as Stale. Å is a letter, and not an accent or umlaut, and the correct way of translating å to a character set that lacks it is "aa". I.e. his name transliterated to English should be Staale.
Some old apps would automatically load html-linked images, but if that is still a problem, it is not the user's fault.
If it's configurable, in a way that A Reasonable Person would understand how to, they get some blame too.
It's not like if IT doesn't do their job, that absolves workers. Security is something that needs to be thought about by everyone, from janitor to CFO.
These are state employees, so firing them for incompetence is not an option.
Not hiring gullible people might, though.
People leaving might be slow, but certain. And if bonuses to those who don't fall for such things might help speed attrition.
Michigan has been the home of communism since Henry Ford died.
Back in the days when communists were red and conservatives were blue, i.e. before a TV channel employee got the two mixed up in a poll presentation and the wrong colours stuck in the minds of largely ignorant Americans.
What we have in the US these days is brown.
I hope they mean that 1/3 opened it in a client that fetched external content or ran a script that connected remotely.
Sending out training and multiple rounds of phishing test emails (which then require more training if you click) is the ONLY way to bring this number down.
No, firing and hiring people with a healthier level of suspicion should work too.
Testing gullibility should be part of applicant screening. If the applicant has given an e-mail address, that's one way of testing. During job interviews is another.
Bonuses for those who never fall for phishing could also be a good idea, helping retain those who Get It.
That said, dinging people for "opening" an e-mail is probably not correct. Looking at the e-mail context as plain text is harmless. There's a huge difference between someone using a default web browser as a mail client and someone using a restricted viewer/previewer that neither runs scripts, fetches anything, nor expands embedded content.
and esc-colon-x
Or simply ZZ.
But these arguments are not in favor of vim, they're in favor of the vi family. I much prefer nvi over vim, not the least due to file locking, and also because undo/redo also works on undo/redo like in vi, while vim has this changed. In vi/nvi, you can hit u u and toggle between undo or not. Also, vim lacks the open mode of vi.
But I'm sure that votes came in for vim because that's the only flavor of vi the the voters knew about. Much like the WTF of more people voting for Chrome over Chromium. Did they actually know the differences, and voted due to that, or did they vote on the only thing they knew?
Addiction rates go way DOWN. Without criminal penalty, more people seek treatment.
More is needed than that. With so many states being right-to-fire states, I suspect that many people do all they can to hide their addiction, so they don't lose their job. Becoming unemployed is likely more of a problem for someone who has an expensive addiction and cannot afford CORBA, cannot afford to pay for rehab, and has no chance of passing a drug screening test to land a new job until the addiction is beaten.
In other countries, social stigma and shame are bigger problems, but here in the US, the economical impact is likely the biggest hurdle.
I can check the time on my watch using only the hand it is on.
No, you can't. You either have to move your hand in a sweeping motion, or tap the screen, otherwise it doesn't display the time. I.e. if you have something in your hands, you cannot tell the time.
Exactly how do you read your watch in the dark?
Who said anything about in the dark? In bed does not equate to in the dark. Especially early in the morning when you wonder whether you can sleep for a little longer, or if you live up North and it really doesn't get dark at all during summer.
But even when it is dark, many if not most analogue watches have luminescent hands and markings.
This is not an editing error. It's exactly what Mario Lamo wrote. A [sic] might have been in order, though.
Rewrite your will. Improve your funeral plans.
Why? It won't make any difference to you whatsoever. The only reason to do so would be to make others happy enough that you benefit more now than the headaches of doing it.
Sure, but don't tell that to anyone who had major surgery like back surgery or had their wisdom teeth yanked out. You simply can't adapt to that.
Sure you can. People had teeth pulled (even canines, which is a hell of a lot more painful than wisdom teeth), bones broken and passed kidney stones long before there were pain killers. And women give birth without medication even today.
In short, we're sissies due to our culture, unable to grin and bear it. We fear pain almost as much as we fear death.
Adrian Lamo extended that faith to the government. He had faith that the people in government offices were true to their oaths, and he had faith that eventually a proper justice would be served. He had faith that talking to the authorities would lead to a righteous outcome.
Or he was a narc because that was a condition of his lenient sentencing, and he chose to take it.
They actually have to ask your current pain level when taking vitals now
Yes, but you are not under any obligation to answer.
I prefer being seen as uncooperative to being mistreated.