That's wrong. Makes it sound like she only set up her own server to get mobile email, but it was already in place before she became SecState. It also doesn't line up with the published messages about her email being quarantined (posted somewhere on/.), where getting a new secure phone was discussed as a way to deal with the problem. It's what she went with, but one of the other options was officially telling the IT department what her personal address was. Because she didn't, they had to take down the filters on the official servers. Which then got hacked.
You want to talk negligence? In her email dump, there's an exchange where her PA tells her that there are a few ways to deal with her emails being quarantined, including officially claiming her address (I guess department rules require her to file paperwork to have her personal address whitelisted). She didn't want them to know it (absurd, yeah, but it's what she said) so IT had to strip the AV/Spam filters. After that, State's email system got hacked.
Neat. It makes sense, but I have to figure that the general busyness of the dominant hand plays a role. Ever see someone holding coffee in their watch bearing hand get asked for the time? Classic slapstick.
Look at it this way, Spain taxes the transactions that occur within it's borders, but then decides it wants a cut of the profit too even though the profit is generated in another nation. There's nothing a nation like Spain can do about it. They have no right to tax profits generated outside their jurisdiction.
What they haven't done is accept that in a global economy, nations have to compete as well. Particularly in regards to tax rates. Without an international agreement on unified corporate tax rates, this will continue to happen. A single international authority regulating and taxing multinationals is the best way to go, but an agreement between nations to set the same tax rate would also take some heat out of the issue.
That's a sales tax. Countries like Spain are also going after the corporate profits, despite already having had their bite at the apple when they taxed the sale. I suppose they haven't realized that a global economy means nations have to compete as well - in this case, in the form of corporate tax rates.
The parties don't need to lock out competition. Single member districts with first-past-the-post voting takes care of that. The two party system is an emergent property of the electoral system.
From the article it looks like she wouldn't let IT know her address to whitelist it - "We should talk about [...] releasing your e-mail address to the department so you are not going to spam." Which doesn't make sense unless they have some rule in place where a personal address can only be whitelisted if the owner fills out some paperwork saying "This is my personal email address", in which case it doesn't make any kind of sense for her not to do so.
We're decades from this being an actual issue, and given that a democracy effectively can't be this proactive, the bill must be total BS intended specifically to make automation more expensive as compared to human labor.
I don't like having to retype the code, and if I don't get it while the notification is showing, I have to tap my phone up to THREE WHOLE TIMES to open it in the messaging app!
Oh, okay, it's not that big a hassle. It's only slightly more convenient, but I still like that. The Microsoft Authenticator already works that way (and is compatible with anything that can use the Google Authenticator), and I've found that it feels much faster and easier, even if the actual difference is pretty minor.
He did have to return a rather large sum of money that turned out to have come from an active duty Chinese Colonel. I think it was $300,000 in his second campaign, but it may have "only" been $100,000. I forget.
On a side note, American Colonels don't make that kind of money.
In this case it can be representative of a nation's level of development, and therefore personal income/wealth. So the study may simply indicate that there is an inverse relationship between affordability and piracy.
Take driver errors out of the mix and there are still risks to your "too expensive to just replace" investment. You will still need to have it covered against risks - something could fall on it, a mechanical failure (yours or someone else's) could lead to a crash, a drunk passerby could smash your window while it's parked on the street, etc. In the case of a manufacturer error leading to a crash, the insurance companies cover you and sue them.
Insurance is still needed, if for no other reason than that cars are so expensive. The risk would be considerably lower, so the premiums could be a fraction of what they are now and the insurance companies could still be quite profitable,
Thank you, but that doesn't really excuse the high-school-locker-room tone of the title, or naming an unwilling subject. An article on the topic could easily have been written without outing anyone.
If I recall, the article was titled "Peter Thiel is totally gay". Not how one begins a thoughtful piece of social criticism.
Furthermore, there is no objective "right thing" when you're talking about something as deeply and intensely personal as one's sexuality. He was under no obligation to be a role model, and has every right to keep his private life private. And if he had trouble coming to terms with his sexuality, then again, that is his business, and his alone.
There was a responsible way for Gawker to write the piece - ask Thiel for an interview on the subject, and if he said no, move on.
Points for clever wordplay, but it still doesn't line up. Encouraging his supporters to respond in kind to protesters at his rallies, while very much the wrong thing to do, doesn't approach what Mr. Moustache did. If Trump told his supporters to arm themselves and go to Clinton rallies and violently break them up, and then go smash her campaign offices, he'd be approaching that level.
Slashdot Mirror
Pretty dang funny though. I hope it didn't cost you anything more than embarrassment.
Those quotes don't fit the timeline.
You want to talk negligence? In her email dump, there's an exchange where her PA tells her that there are a few ways to deal with her emails being quarantined, including officially claiming her address (I guess department rules require her to file paperwork to have her personal address whitelisted). She didn't want them to know it (absurd, yeah, but it's what she said) so IT had to strip the AV/Spam filters. After that, State's email system got hacked.
Neat. It makes sense, but I have to figure that the general busyness of the dominant hand plays a role. Ever see someone holding coffee in their watch bearing hand get asked for the time? Classic slapstick.
Pretty much, yeah. It's how people avoid pouring coffee all over themselves when asked for the time.
What they haven't done is accept that in a global economy, nations have to compete as well. Particularly in regards to tax rates. Without an international agreement on unified corporate tax rates, this will continue to happen. A single international authority regulating and taxing multinationals is the best way to go, but an agreement between nations to set the same tax rate would also take some heat out of the issue.
That's a sales tax. Countries like Spain are also going after the corporate profits, despite already having had their bite at the apple when they taxed the sale. I suppose they haven't realized that a global economy means nations have to compete as well - in this case, in the form of corporate tax rates.
Well, Warren is angling for a slot on the ticket. Which makes this a little foolish considering Google is very much on Hillary's side.
The parties don't need to lock out competition. Single member districts with first-past-the-post voting takes care of that. The two party system is an emergent property of the electoral system.
From the article it looks like she wouldn't let IT know her address to whitelist it - "We should talk about [...] releasing your e-mail address to the department so you are not going to spam." Which doesn't make sense unless they have some rule in place where a personal address can only be whitelisted if the owner fills out some paperwork saying "This is my personal email address", in which case it doesn't make any kind of sense for her not to do so.
We're decades from this being an actual issue, and given that a democracy effectively can't be this proactive, the bill must be total BS intended specifically to make automation more expensive as compared to human labor.
Oh, okay, it's not that big a hassle. It's only slightly more convenient, but I still like that. The Microsoft Authenticator already works that way (and is compatible with anything that can use the Google Authenticator), and I've found that it feels much faster and easier, even if the actual difference is pretty minor.
He's one of the few people I can point to and say, "he made my life easier." Thank you for SysInternals Mark!
I've been wondering about this... Regardless of how exactly it works (though I am interested) it's pretty dang cool.
Either you sell ads XOR you sell a subscription. That's how the media market works.
Yes, yes it is.
You don't buy someone off and then throw the money away by revealing it.
On a side note, American Colonels don't make that kind of money.
In this case it can be representative of a nation's level of development, and therefore personal income/wealth. So the study may simply indicate that there is an inverse relationship between affordability and piracy.
Insurance is still needed, if for no other reason than that cars are so expensive. The risk would be considerably lower, so the premiums could be a fraction of what they are now and the insurance companies could still be quite profitable,
Thank you, but that doesn't really excuse the high-school-locker-room tone of the title, or naming an unwilling subject. An article on the topic could easily have been written without outing anyone.
search google and/or facebook.
Furthermore, there is no objective "right thing" when you're talking about something as deeply and intensely personal as one's sexuality. He was under no obligation to be a role model, and has every right to keep his private life private. And if he had trouble coming to terms with his sexuality, then again, that is his business, and his alone.
There was a responsible way for Gawker to write the piece - ask Thiel for an interview on the subject, and if he said no, move on.
Points for clever wordplay, but it still doesn't line up. Encouraging his supporters to respond in kind to protesters at his rallies, while very much the wrong thing to do, doesn't approach what Mr. Moustache did. If Trump told his supporters to arm themselves and go to Clinton rallies and violently break them up, and then go smash her campaign offices, he'd be approaching that level.
I can't parse your wording.