So you really believe that armed minorities in Germany would have managed to oppose in any significant way the German army?
It took the might of the Soviet Union with collaboration of the US and what was left of the British army (after they were kicked out from Continental Europe by Hitler) to stop the Nazis.
If you truly believe that a rag tag resistance would have hindered in any way the might of the German army (and people, you say the disarmed the German people like if they were not the brainwashed, humiliated populace looking for a Messiah to lead them into glory).
And they are not immerse in a bloodbath between alcohol traffickers.
The abundant supply of weapons, courtesy of the idiocy that is the pro-gun lobby's interpretation of the US Constitution, is surely a factor in the tragedy that is becoming life in some places in Mexico.
Surely you would have a copy in a server (and the respective backups).
What you don;t want is that a copy of *that* data that is in transit is easily accessible (did you seriously think that the copy in the drive would be the only one???).
They may have the right to check what you have up to, then can even fire you for wasting company's time, but sure as hell they can do whatever they want with the pictures of your family or the novel you were writing. (unless your company makes specific provisions for all this, otherwise it is not the default).
If the company forbids all access, then why do they have internet access in the first place? (if you need access to a few website it is a piece of cake to restrict access elsewhere).
He has made himself the face of Apple, and actually he is the CEO, so for good or evil, any discussion about Apple will at the end gravitate towards what Jobs may be thinking or doing.
No wonder directors don't share your "vision": they have something to say and 3D is just a massive distraction which aims to achieve all the objectives you mention, which have nothing to do with making a better film.
"Feature films aren't really doing much that's exciting or interesting with the time they are allotted"
I am sorry, but your lack of curiosity or education is not a parameter of the state of health of cinema.
European cinema is ebullient with great movies, Latin American cinema is exploring social issues others don't touch, and the far east, specially South Korea, are providing the weirdest most imaginative movies of recent years.
Two of the best Latin American books every, "Pedro Paramo" and "El Llano en llamas" by Juan Rulfo ( from which pretty much every major magic realism writer takes his clues) are often sold in one volume because they are quite short.
Perhaps those geniuses in HBO (really?.....) are unable to communicate an idea succinctly and eloquently.
You see? They could actually be dressing a shortcoming as a virtue.
Labour made very clear that they would continue the Big Brother policies, some of its senior members (like the pernicious David Blunket) basked in the glory of introducing those invasive measures.
I would like to know where are you getting your information about what Labour would have done, because it is the first time I hear thwy would have undone their labour of love of 13 years of lost oportunities.
All this dogs and guns nonsense applies mostly to the US where a) You have lots of space. b) You worship guns irrationally.
for the rest of us, who mostly live in urban environments, often in cramped conditions (try buying a flat some time in London, count yourself lucky if you can afford something of 50 or 60 sqm, great living conditions for you and that mastiff you want to live with) and where guns are forbidden or heavily restricted, all the USian chest thumping about dogs and guns is farcical posturing.
In the UK your home alarm guarantees you will have a cop in 10 minutes or less. The police (not a security firm, but the Police itself) are understandably very thorough to ensure false alarms are kept to a minimum.
As for guns, thieves know you don;t have them so they rarely use them, and anyway most people would make a bad situation worse.
So protection number one are locks, closely followed by quality doors and windows. It is shocking to see how many doors have hinges in the outside of the property, waiting for the kind screwdriver that will liberate them form their oppressive frame.....
"Corporate security already implies a level of trust"
No wonder your post anonymously.
Rule #1: trust nobody, specially the people who already are in. Those are the most dangerous people. This is nothing personal and has nothing to do with respect or interpersonal trust, a security person should assume that anybody is a threat, anything less than that is laziness and complacency.
People should only have access to what they need to perform their work. Not a single bit more.
In a serious company to think that the server room is a vector of attack is laughable. All server cabinets would be locked, access would be severely restricted and logged, anybody entering would need to be escorted by a third party to ensure he is doing only what he is supposed to be doing.
If you have only 20 machines then the data is not writeable locally, all goes to a server which is secured properly.
As for getting a root password from a sys admin, the only way for this to happen is if you put a gun to the head of somebody, and even then there are techniques to know that the person is giving a password under duress and take action without endangering people's safety (i.e. switching to dummy data if such situation arises).
Guys, this is not new, stop the excuses, secure your systems properly.
Password policies should be just part of your overall security policy.
I keep reading people complaining about colleagues or users writing down their passwords and leaving them in full view. My reply to this is: why your security policy does not include a visual inspection of the work place?
Say what you may, but if passwords are not in full view or easy to reach then they are safe.
An employee writing passwords down and then locking them away is OK, the proverbial guy with sticky notes on his monitor is *your* fault for not having integrated security policies that are not constrained to computers only.
If your password is found written anywhere you are fired.
Places doing this consistently and fairly see all the sticky notes gone.
And to all those "oh please, evaluate why people are doing it" get a grip, the bucket must stop somewhere, at the end people are there to perform a job, and sometimes this is not done in the best of conditions, so the policies in place are there to mitigate risks, not to make users life pleasant.
If you have money for an elegant solution go ahead, by my guest, get yourself one of those SecureID or Safeword servers and a load of expensive tokens, or contract with on of those providers that allow you to send password tokens via SMS. And tell me how big was your bill.
If people can't be arsed to cooperate to keep security adequate then they should not be working for you.
That those children or young adults go to the local rubbish dump and try to make a living by collecting anything that may still have some minimal value?
What we should be fighting for is for good working conditions for children and people in general (children, when they need to work, should do it in very controlled conditions ensuring no abuse takes place, short shifts, all pay paid, etc. A blanket ban on working children may actually be not in the interests of many children out there ).
What many people in rich countries fail miserably to understand is that working is not necessarily the worst option for many children out there.
Slashdot Mirror
Many people in Africa or India, where big carnivores roam freely, have got no access to guns.
They remain in relatively safety by being wise in their interactions with wild animals in nature.
So you really believe that armed minorities in Germany would have managed to oppose in any significant way the German army?
It took the might of the Soviet Union with collaboration of the US and what was left of the British army (after they were kicked out from Continental Europe by Hitler) to stop the Nazis.
If you truly believe that a rag tag resistance would have hindered in any way the might of the German army (and people, you say the disarmed the German people like if they were not the brainwashed, humiliated populace looking for a Messiah to lead them into glory).
And they are not immerse in a bloodbath between alcohol traffickers.
The abundant supply of weapons, courtesy of the idiocy that is the pro-gun lobby's interpretation of the US Constitution, is surely a factor in the tragedy that is becoming life in some places in Mexico.
The cavalier right of USians to own guns means drug dealers have easy access to them in Mexico and elsewhere.
The pathetic controls in place in the USA has a direct impact in the lives of Mexicans south of the border.
Only sheer hypocrisy can turn a blind eye to this.
SSL authority: you.
Surely you would have a copy in a server (and the respective backups).
What you don;t want is that a copy of *that* data that is in transit is easily accessible (did you seriously think that the copy in the drive would be the only one???).
They may have the right to check what you have up to, then can even fire you for wasting company's time, but sure as hell they can do whatever they want with the pictures of your family or the novel you were writing. (unless your company makes specific provisions for all this, otherwise it is not the default).
Use common sense.
If the company forbids all access, then why do they have internet access in the first place? (if you need access to a few website it is a piece of cake to restrict access elsewhere).
And how do you call it when companies force people to work over time without payment?
Companies can have it any way they want it, but employees have to act subserviently and avoiding the most basic rules of common sense....
.... if companies didn't encroach in personal time.
He has made himself the face of Apple, and actually he is the CEO, so for good or evil, any discussion about Apple will at the end gravitate towards what Jobs may be thinking or doing.
All dictatorial individuals can shape things on their own based on their irrepressible charisma.
Why you think that is a complement is a mystery to me, I thought most people have studied a bit of history in primary school.
I just resent I would be literally forced to use it if I would buy almost any PC except Apple's.
Films first were an entirely adult affair.
Now movies for teenagers are what sustains the industry.
And now you are saying is that kids will decide how this art progresses?
Why is our society so eager to be more infantile?
Or "Slumdog Millionaire" for that matter....
You talk like a marketing person, not en editor.
No wonder directors don't share your "vision": they have something to say and 3D is just a massive distraction which aims to achieve all the objectives you mention, which have nothing to do with making a better film.
And it takes just a couple of classes of cinema theory to understand that what makes or brakes a film is a good plot.
The "visuals" as you call them are the tool to move the plot forward, but the plot remains at the centre of any good film.
"Feature films aren't really doing much that's exciting or interesting with the time they are allotted"
I am sorry, but your lack of curiosity or education is not a parameter of the state of health of cinema.
European cinema is ebullient with great movies, Latin American cinema is exploring social issues others don't touch, and the far east, specially South Korea, are providing the weirdest most imaginative movies of recent years.
Chopin wrote only for piano, mostly short pieces.
Wagner best works are hours long.
Who was the best composer?
Two of the best Latin American books every, "Pedro Paramo" and "El Llano en llamas" by Juan Rulfo ( from which pretty much every major magic realism writer takes his clues) are often sold in one volume because they are quite short.
Perhaps those geniuses in HBO (really?.....) are unable to communicate an idea succinctly and eloquently.
You see? They could actually be dressing a shortcoming as a virtue.
Labour made very clear that they would continue the Big Brother policies, some of its senior members (like the pernicious David Blunket) basked in the glory of introducing those invasive measures.
I would like to know where are you getting your information about what Labour would have done, because it is the first time I hear thwy would have undone their labour of love of 13 years of lost oportunities.
OK, lets get some things straight.
All this dogs and guns nonsense applies mostly to the US where
a) You have lots of space.
b) You worship guns irrationally.
for the rest of us, who mostly live in urban environments, often in cramped conditions (try buying a flat some time in London, count yourself lucky if you can afford something of 50 or 60 sqm, great living conditions for you and that mastiff you want to live with) and where guns are forbidden or heavily restricted, all the USian chest thumping about dogs and guns is farcical posturing.
In the UK your home alarm guarantees you will have a cop in 10 minutes or less. The police (not a security firm, but the Police itself) are understandably very thorough to ensure false alarms are kept to a minimum.
As for guns, thieves know you don;t have them so they rarely use them, and anyway most people would make a bad situation worse.
So protection number one are locks, closely followed by quality doors and windows. It is shocking to see how many doors have hinges in the outside of the property, waiting for the kind screwdriver that will liberate them form their oppressive frame.....
"Corporate security already implies a level of trust"
No wonder your post anonymously.
Rule #1: trust nobody, specially the people who already are in. Those are the most dangerous people. This is nothing personal and has nothing to do with respect or interpersonal trust, a security person should assume that anybody is a threat, anything less than that is laziness and complacency.
People should only have access to what they need to perform their work. Not a single bit more.
In a serious company to think that the server room is a vector of attack is laughable. All server cabinets would be locked, access would be severely restricted and logged, anybody entering would need to be escorted by a third party to ensure he is doing only what he is supposed to be doing.
If you have only 20 machines then the data is not writeable locally, all goes to a server which is secured properly.
As for getting a root password from a sys admin, the only way for this to happen is if you put a gun to the head of somebody, and even then there are techniques to know that the person is giving a password under duress and take action without endangering people's safety (i.e. switching to dummy data if such situation arises).
Guys, this is not new, stop the excuses, secure your systems properly.
Password policies should be just part of your overall security policy.
I keep reading people complaining about colleagues or users writing down their passwords and leaving them in full view. My reply to this is: why your security policy does not include a visual inspection of the work place?
Say what you may, but if passwords are not in full view or easy to reach then they are safe.
An employee writing passwords down and then locking them away is OK, the proverbial guy with sticky notes on his monitor is *your* fault for not having integrated security policies that are not constrained to computers only.
If your password is found written anywhere you are fired.
Places doing this consistently and fairly see all the sticky notes gone.
And to all those "oh please, evaluate why people are doing it" get a grip, the bucket must stop somewhere, at the end people are there to perform a job, and sometimes this is not done in the best of conditions, so the policies in place are there to mitigate risks, not to make users life pleasant.
If you have money for an elegant solution go ahead, by my guest, get yourself one of those SecureID or Safeword servers and a load of expensive tokens, or contract with on of those providers that allow you to send password tokens via SMS. And tell me how big was your bill.
If people can't be arsed to cooperate to keep security adequate then they should not be working for you.
That those children or young adults go to the local rubbish dump and try to make a living by collecting anything that may still have some minimal value?
What we should be fighting for is for good working conditions for children and people in general (children, when they need to work, should do it in very controlled conditions ensuring no abuse takes place, short shifts, all pay paid, etc. A blanket ban on working children may actually be not in the interests of many children out there ).
What many people in rich countries fail miserably to understand is that working is not necessarily the worst option for many children out there.