It is about professional and most efficient handling of the given circumstances. We are mostly professionals gathering here. Teenagers are not very likely to have balls for arranging that scale of operations with the quality needed.
I am not going to deal with your opinion just because it bears very little in the above-mentioned light of professional stance.
You can widen the use of the word, deriving from what terror is associated with: ORIGIN late Middle English : from Old French terrour, from Latin terror, from terrere ‘frighten.’ Take a look at the meanings of terrorize, for your next.
If digging a little, you would quickly find, that "the definition of terrorism has proven controversial". This gives you no good ground to tell that you know better than others what the word means.
There is something to make good out of this very bad habit: those, that were certainly cornered into making pay terrorists, have to recognize need to submit any decryption tools they were provided with to the people, fighting terrorists of that kind. That including analysts of the BleepingComputer community, makers of security tools, Kaspersky is one that springs to mind in regard to providing decryption utilities for public. Traces of communication and funds have to be professionally investigated as well, as far as it is possible.
There is no acceptable answer in just paying ransom, funding terrorists for their next gigs.
They spend quite a lot, but if you follow corporate strategies closely, you have left no room for local ideas. The thing is: central decisions, high expectations on units' results, local concerns they do have not that much in common. Of course, GMs of the units try to meet ends, but all those constraints differ just by design of the structure. And if you didn't know, it is major challenge for an organization to grow. One of the biggest, I'd say.
It is very large, fast or even fastest in their profile growing corporation, but each unit is stuffed with equipment, very naturally prone to hazards. IT does make forefront of abilities to grow fast, but at the same time each particular unit is set high expectation of profit returns. I hope this enlightens you tiny bit more.
Tape drives are great, just expensive to purchase and of limited capacity. You keep some tapes offsite - probably in your bank, by the way. How will your setup stand flood (now occurring periodically in the buildings I watch) or fire? Arrangement itself is good. You are overly confident in your personal experience.
Do you realize, that: a) content of your $99 investment is going to be encrypted along by ransomware in exactly the same manner? b) $99 investment alone, even if you are thinking yourself being one smartass super duper user, is not going to include you professional services of setting proper backup safety net?
When you have reality client with the mission on profit, who does not want to spend on new backup equipment before seeing old one definitely die, does not want to spend on outsourced services beyond the utmost necessity, but naturally has ever growing set of files - you have reality looking into your face for some reasonable choices. Then you do the best, you can, but it is not dream come true.
You see, everyone is using computers nowadays. Everyone. Which means, that you are actually dealing with the whole spectrum of users, that's given. As an IT administrator, I am given that given, too. Of course, there are some users that are not able to handle one challenge or another, or nearly any sometimes. It's us, IT guys, who keep backups for those users (well, best of us do). There is no good mapping in that structure, if it is mature enough to be of structured kind.
China people work hard to supply the world with the things, whatever illusionary they happen to be. But you must be spot on with the remainder of your statement. Screw terrorists.
So reasonable. Unless guys are not from a civilized part of the world, no need seen to restate namely. And this is why they do what they do with more courage, than you can yourself imagine.
Not quite so, you oversimplify on your modest experience. Backup storage has limits. Information tends to ever grow. I intentionally skip large multimedia files, like collection of pictures from company parties, for example, from backing - to have vital things on backup media. Thus, when ransomware hits, and you have network share content completely encrypted, you still have stuff to sort, and keep all the share users off bay, until situation is investigated and put back under (some) control. While people really long for vast collection of sentimental pics, that remains encrypted pile of nonsense for a while. But do not feed terrorist, this has to be professional determination, made firm and clear.
There is no simplified mapping between my awareness and danger-exposed user end. We had recently ransomware visit, too. Hi, Russia! One should not feed terrorist at any cost.
And there are only those attackers, naturally. No others will be informed where to find those, who are willing to pay, and what to do for that. So, they just integrated terrorism into their business as usual. What perspectives this does actually open?
They are already that, only much more. Whoever was following Russia's activities, taken in response of Ukraine trying to move westwards, could make very rich picture of their omnidirectional efforts to set this back. And with a chunk of "taken back" pieces of Ukrainian soil, they surpassed North Korea by far.
What NATO should do in a country, that is not even a member of that treaty yet? By unlucky chance, abused by Putin in very lucky manner.
It isn't Russia specifically. I see enough malware coming from the US too.
Hi, AC. I have been raised within USSR. Well within russian-centered cultural layer. Let me tell you, that you are wrong. Because it is Russia, that sees itself as a (specifically) developed alternative to the domination of capitalist surrounding. It is Russia crackers, that want to shave-off bitcoins you pay them to decrypt your stolen content, while feeling no sentiment to the world that is hostile to their points-of-view. It is very natural, that they do not bother their own folks, because tat is not a target at all of their quite organized effort. It happens to clearly indicate boundaries of their dealing.
I happened to study yet good while back their pretty legal magazine publications, focusing on security - being based on samples of breaking it. Yeah, it is no surprise at all, this kind of "security investigations" still thrives and is practiced there more than somewhere elsewhere. Position of Russia-the-state should not surprise one neither, seeing war on capitalism domination in that department pretty normal matter, too. Think different - oh yeah, babe.
Thanks for illustrating, I had an idea from your former description that wasn't stretching as far, as this confusing design obviously does. I am in Europe, Lithuania, and it would be quickly pointed as flaw and misleading in my city, that is doing rather well in terms of communication infrastructure. The irony being, they have outsourced remake of the intersection that I was describing to the least expensive offer of the company from the other end of our country - capital, actually. Very effective business doers they must be. But obviously did not do it as right, as for the work to be named good.
Coming from the side road, I am found guilty in the mentioned case, but I still nurture hope to appeal investigation, that appears too shallow - in the rules it is set also, that driver is obliged to slow down and even stop to avoid accident, while very naturally having slowed down before turn, other driver proceeded his course right into my car, without any obvious attempt to avoid contact from occurring. In that light, I do not see only one party guilty. Little could be said on how well behaving and indicating the other car was before accident - it is not uncommon here to not flash turn signals before maneuver. Overall, driving is mixed bag here, even though roads are relatively well developed, EU money did flow into this recently, too. It was pleasure to meet you here;-)
It seems like you understood it like being central lane of the main road, where I was describing side road with the center line set in hard now. Main road has two lanes in both directions, and separating part with the grass growing on in the middle. Main road does have slowing lane appearing before turn into side road. The main problem I find is exactly central white line established on the side road, that made maneuvers harder to accomplish - it was not an improvement at all, even though visually more marking may appear as such. One really should not assume more marking results in better quality of the actual driving!
It can do, though it depends. In my neighborhood, there is medium sized side-road intersection, rather active one, that was changed pavement / revised several months ago. It did not have central line on the side road before. People, that used road, were able to carefully position their vehicles in three lines, with the middle usually designated for turning left. There was enough space usually left to turn in, turn out rightwards. All was very flexible and dynamic to the need. Enter revision with the central line hard set. It became difficult to turn left, because central line always keeps you farther right from your goal of the maneuver. More that this, you have to really take unnatural right turn to fit into marking, where you are expected to appear to enter main road further. It takes you longer, and exposes to all kind of the danger. I have to admit being crashed into there within those couple of months since "improvement" was done.
Google can block stuff, but it first has to be grounded, that content violates lawful presence. Coming from presumption of innocence, it is lawfully allowed to be found by users before that happens. While also google is quite correctly pointing to the fact, that sites can not legally operate, if they are unlawful - their act has to cease not depending on google at all.
Slashdot Mirror
It is about professional and most efficient handling of the given circumstances. We are mostly professionals gathering here. Teenagers are not very likely to have balls for arranging that scale of operations with the quality needed.
I am not going to deal with your opinion just because it bears very little in the above-mentioned light of professional stance.
You can widen the use of the word, deriving from what terror is associated with:
ORIGIN late Middle English : from Old French terrour, from Latin terror, from terrere ‘frighten.’
Take a look at the meanings of terrorize, for your next.
If digging a little, you would quickly find, that "the definition of terrorism has proven controversial".
This gives you no good ground to tell that you know better than others what the word means.
There is something to make good out of this very bad habit: those, that were certainly cornered into making pay terrorists, have to recognize need to submit any decryption tools they were provided with to the people, fighting terrorists of that kind. That including analysts of the BleepingComputer community, makers of security tools, Kaspersky is one that springs to mind in regard to providing decryption utilities for public. Traces of communication and funds have to be professionally investigated as well, as far as it is possible.
There is no acceptable answer in just paying ransom, funding terrorists for their next gigs.
They spend quite a lot, but if you follow corporate strategies closely, you have left no room for local ideas. The thing is: central decisions, high expectations on units' results, local concerns they do have not that much in common. Of course, GMs of the units try to meet ends, but all those constraints differ just by design of the structure. And if you didn't know, it is major challenge for an organization to grow. One of the biggest, I'd say.
By the way key reliance on Internet connectivity is synonymous to the key exposure to vulnerabilities, that's inevitable.
It is very large, fast or even fastest in their profile growing corporation, but each unit is stuffed with equipment, very naturally prone to hazards. IT does make forefront of abilities to grow fast, but at the same time each particular unit is set high expectation of profit returns. I hope this enlightens you tiny bit more.
Tape drives are great, just expensive to purchase and of limited capacity. You keep some tapes offsite - probably in your bank, by the way. How will your setup stand flood (now occurring periodically in the buildings I watch) or fire? Arrangement itself is good. You are overly confident in your personal experience.
Cool. But reality hits again: it is set corporately, that this is not what you ought to do. You can do it at home, though.
Do you realize, that:
a) content of your $99 investment is going to be encrypted along by ransomware in exactly the same manner?
b) $99 investment alone, even if you are thinking yourself being one smartass super duper user, is not going to include you professional services of setting proper backup safety net?
When you have reality client with the mission on profit, who does not want to spend on new backup equipment before seeing old one definitely die, does not want to spend on outsourced services beyond the utmost necessity, but naturally has ever growing set of files - you have reality looking into your face for some reasonable choices. Then you do the best, you can, but it is not dream come true.
You see, everyone is using computers nowadays. Everyone. Which means, that you are actually dealing with the whole spectrum of users, that's given. As an IT administrator, I am given that given, too. Of course, there are some users that are not able to handle one challenge or another, or nearly any sometimes.
It's us, IT guys, who keep backups for those users (well, best of us do). There is no good mapping in that structure, if it is mature enough to be of structured kind.
China people work hard to supply the world with the things, whatever illusionary they happen to be.
But you must be spot on with the remainder of your statement. Screw terrorists.
So reasonable. Unless guys are not from a civilized part of the world, no need seen to restate namely.
And this is why they do what they do with more courage, than you can yourself imagine.
Not quite so, you oversimplify on your modest experience. Backup storage has limits. Information tends to ever grow. I intentionally skip large multimedia files, like collection of pictures from company parties, for example, from backing - to have vital things on backup media. Thus, when ransomware hits, and you have network share content completely encrypted, you still have stuff to sort, and keep all the share users off bay, until situation is investigated and put back under (some) control. While people really long for vast collection of sentimental pics, that remains encrypted pile of nonsense for a while.
But do not feed terrorist, this has to be professional determination, made firm and clear.
There is no simplified mapping between my awareness and danger-exposed user end. We had recently ransomware visit, too. Hi, Russia!
One should not feed terrorist at any cost.
And there are only those attackers, naturally. No others will be informed where to find those, who are willing to pay, and what to do for that.
So, they just integrated terrorism into their business as usual. What perspectives this does actually open?
They are already that, only much more. Whoever was following Russia's activities, taken in response of Ukraine trying to move westwards, could make very rich picture of their omnidirectional efforts to set this back. And with a chunk of "taken back" pieces of Ukrainian soil, they surpassed North Korea by far.
What NATO should do in a country, that is not even a member of that treaty yet? By unlucky chance, abused by Putin in very lucky manner.
Thieves they are.
It isn't Russia specifically. I see enough malware coming from the US too.
Hi, AC. I have been raised within USSR. Well within russian-centered cultural layer. Let me tell you, that you are wrong. Because it is Russia, that sees itself as a (specifically) developed alternative to the domination of capitalist surrounding. It is Russia crackers, that want to shave-off bitcoins you pay them to decrypt your stolen content, while feeling no sentiment to the world that is hostile to their points-of-view. It is very natural, that they do not bother their own folks, because tat is not a target at all of their quite organized effort. It happens to clearly indicate boundaries of their dealing.
I happened to study yet good while back their pretty legal magazine publications, focusing on security - being based on samples of breaking it. Yeah, it is no surprise at all, this kind of "security investigations" still thrives and is practiced there more than somewhere elsewhere. Position of Russia-the-state should not surprise one neither, seeing war on capitalism domination in that department pretty normal matter, too. Think different - oh yeah, babe.
This thingie must be turned backwards: is it really so, that absolutely no useful work can be offered in exchange to UBI?
Thanks for illustrating, I had an idea from your former description that wasn't stretching as far, as this confusing design obviously does. I am in Europe, Lithuania, and it would be quickly pointed as flaw and misleading in my city, that is doing rather well in terms of communication infrastructure. The irony being, they have outsourced remake of the intersection that I was describing to the least expensive offer of the company from the other end of our country - capital, actually. Very effective business doers they must be. But obviously did not do it as right, as for the work to be named good.
Coming from the side road, I am found guilty in the mentioned case, but I still nurture hope to appeal investigation, that appears too shallow - in the rules it is set also, that driver is obliged to slow down and even stop to avoid accident, while very naturally having slowed down before turn, other driver proceeded his course right into my car, without any obvious attempt to avoid contact from occurring. In that light, I do not see only one party guilty. Little could be said on how well behaving and indicating the other car was before accident - it is not uncommon here to not flash turn signals before maneuver. Overall, driving is mixed bag here, even though roads are relatively well developed, EU money did flow into this recently, too. It was pleasure to meet you here ;-)
It seems like you understood it like being central lane of the main road, where I was describing side road with the center line set in hard now. Main road has two lanes in both directions, and separating part with the grass growing on in the middle. Main road does have slowing lane appearing before turn into side road. The main problem I find is exactly central white line established on the side road, that made maneuvers harder to accomplish - it was not an improvement at all, even though visually more marking may appear as such. One really should not assume more marking results in better quality of the actual driving!
"...unnatural left turn" it was meant to be, pardon.
It can do, though it depends. In my neighborhood, there is medium sized side-road intersection, rather active one, that was changed pavement / revised several months ago. It did not have central line on the side road before. People, that used road, were able to carefully position their vehicles in three lines, with the middle usually designated for turning left. There was enough space usually left to turn in, turn out rightwards. All was very flexible and dynamic to the need. Enter revision with the central line hard set. It became difficult to turn left, because central line always keeps you farther right from your goal of the maneuver. More that this, you have to really take unnatural right turn to fit into marking, where you are expected to appear to enter main road further. It takes you longer, and exposes to all kind of the danger. I have to admit being crashed into there within those couple of months since "improvement" was done.
Of course, we are discussing here original claim of it doing nothing over the content it serves.
Google can block stuff, but it first has to be grounded, that content violates lawful presence. Coming from presumption of innocence, it is lawfully allowed to be found by users before that happens. While also google is quite correctly pointing to the fact, that sites can not legally operate, if they are unlawful - their act has to cease not depending on google at all.