Until this stuff is regulated as HIPAA medical information, which will dramatically increase the cost, this is a "no-fly zone" for me, and probably should be for you too. Self regulation doesn't cut it. LE requests should have a higher level of scrutiny.
Hi. You should not listen to a thing RT has to say, and I wish Slashdot wouldn't okay articles sourced to them.
They are a propaganda/disinformation outlet.
I expect to be modded down by Russians now, so mods, I hope you're scanning at -1.
I just bought 2010 for $5. Maybe I paid too much? LOL.
The ending was obvious, and leaving it open to speculation made it art. People need to learn to use their brains. Not everything has a pat answer that someone else has come up with. Sometimes you have to come up with your own answers.
Why is this comment magically at -1? This is what FB is really asking. Is it okay for us to continuously monitor private messaging on our platform?
They just use the "think about the children" loaded question so that you knee-jerk answer "Yes," when the answer should totally be, "If you're providing a private messaging service, then that should remain private. You should comply with any valid search warrant to monitor communications, but we don't do precrime, so we can't just monitor everyone, without a writ."
At least as I understand US law. Other countries may be different. Is precrime a thing in other countries?
I mean, OP might be a little gruff and paranoid, but I don't see any problem with this comment at all that would garner a mod down.
Those people are paid well and trained to not pause when the shit hits the fan. When she fell, it could have been a sniper. They were facing outward to survey the scene.
Mind you, Hillary's imagination about being under fire is breathtaking, but what you saw was SOP, and you don't even have the sense to realize it.
Some people like to call Trump a fascist, and this, potentially nationalizing what now belongs to private industry to serve the body state, is a feature of Mussolini's corporatism (not the usual government by and for the corporations, as it is commonly used, but private industry serving the corporate (body) state).
Now, I know they're talking about Federal ownership like the way the roads are maintained, but do you think a compromise deal between privatization and government ownership might include the beginnings of corporatism? It just might.
Oh... and Ajit Pai is a tool. This actually isn't a bad idea, if the government wants to roll out 5G securely and quickly, but it is a bad idea if private industry winds up being mixed up in co-ownership with the government. That's not a good thing at all.
The only problem I have with the Quicken subscription is they are charging the full boxed software price, that used to get you three years of download functionality, for every year of the subscription. That's a threefold price increase! I hope they reap what they sow and adjust the price to what a yearly subscription should cost.
If you aren't involved in credit application activities, get a credit freeze at all three agencies now. Then they will not provide information. Make things difficult for any fraudster.
You can lift the freeze when you need to.
Caveat: It costs money, but it's currently free at Equifax (the page is sometimes cratered, however).
Good luck everyone. And kudos to LifeLock's cracker department (JK).
Maybe we haven't heard from other species because it is physically impossible to bridge the light-years gap. Maybe faster than light information transmission, let alone faster than light travel, is not possible. Maybe intelligent species appear, on-average, hundreds or even thousands of light years away from each other, and the chance of any two species being sufficiently close to overcome the distance problems is astronomically small. Physics seems to suggest that bridging such distances is virtually impossible, why don't we believe it? That would also explain the silence, although it would be a blow to our indomitable technological idealism as a species (especially in the US where we tend to believe there's a tech fix for any problem).
It would also be a blow to the modern analog to believing that the earth is the center of the universe. Who says intelligent life occurs frequently enough that events within a 100-1,000 light-years of each other are common? Our own idealist self-centeredness, that's what. Maybe it happens once in a fucking galaxy on average. Maybe the universe doesn't care if we're a little lonely.
Just throwin' it out there. That's a *lot* of space to traverse for inter-species communication. Maybe nobody's figured it out yet and maybe nobody ever will. Until we have better evidence that we are completely wrong about the severity of that impediment, we should probably be worrying about things that happen here. I don't think we need to come up with science fiction stories (this article isn't about a scientific theory) about how we're destroying ourselves, we appear to be doing so in reality, and we had better overcome it.
Ah. You see what you did there? You presumed the person who is being excluded has been correctly identified as a wrongdoer and, without question, deserves to be excluded. In fact, anyone who gets offended thinks without a doubt that the person who offended them is wrong, but it is not always the case. In fact, there are two sides to every story, not just the story of the offended party.
So basically, we should cater to people who make complaints and never, never question their judgement? Sorry. I don't want to live in that world. It glorifies whiners, and gives the thin-skinned unbelievable power to ruin people's lives.
Not that everyone who complains is a thin-skinned whiner. There are plenty of legitimate complainants. I merely assert that thin-skinned whiners who are in need of personal therapy, not the granting of righteous retribution, exist.
I don't doubt that for a second. I have met completely unreasonable people before. They lurk on all sides of the political spectrum, and they don't deserve this power.
So the question is, since it's called "Defender," do you need to run their lukewarm, signature-based Defender antivirus to use the EMET features? Because that would be a deal-breaker for me.
Maybe if we decided that companies running server farms must legally be separate entities from the businesses that they serve, but in this case, AWS is run by a major competitor in the retail sphere, and there are definitely security concerns for Wal-Mart because the compute services are being offered by the same company.
Corporate espionage is a thing, and cloud services haven't been around long enough to be properly regulated. We're going to find out all sorts of shady stuff in the coming decades that is being done now, on corporately-owned hardware, and will be illegal later. I have no idea what that shady stuff is, but I expect to read about it in the papers in the next 20-30 years.
If you are on social media, you are having real-world interactions. The whole idea that our presence via technology is somehow illusory and insubstantial is false. The Internet is the "real world."
That said, to state the obvious, there are a number of non-verbal (heck, even some verbal) cues that are missing from on-line interaction. Sarcasm requires tags. We are still discovering why people can become so awful in text, why they are emboldened to be hateful (beyond just anonymity) when they never would do so in-person. But all of it is real. Those are real words, from real people, unless you're talking to an MS chat bot.
Whatever you see on social media is real people doing real things. Even if they're lying, they're really lying. It is probably better if we all took our on-line presence at least as seriously as we would behave in a bar, even if there is no chance of a fight breaking out. Calling it not the "real-world" keeps us from behaving with responsibility. Reject this false separation of worlds.
Yes. There were transcripts of Flynn talking to the Russian ambassador, so there were wiretaps done on foreign communications. Nobody is questioning whether or not some monitoring of Trump campaign officials was happening.
Nowhere does that say Obama ordered it. Nowhere does it say it was Trump himself that was monitored. It was part of an investigation and done based on evidence with court approval, not some fiat declaration from the dictator-in-chief, which is apparently what Trump supporters think the president is.
The presidency is not a monarchical position. The POTUS does not have king-like powers. One of the things he cannot do, since the Nixon administration, is order a wiretap. Only a court can approve that (including the FISA secret court) and only after an active investigation provides enough evidence to get a warrant.
Get that? Do you have a tape of Obama ordering the tap? No? Then you have nothing. Nor does Trump, by the looks of it.
That's why Comey is out there asking for the Justice Department to repudiate Trump's claim, because it's a bigger lie about the way our formerly stable republic works than it is about Obama. Trump isn't undermining Obama, he's undermining his own government. He is acting like a fifth-columnist, hopefully not wittingly.
Great so you set "travel mode." And then what? Lock it with a different password? The TLA involved will just ask you for the credentials to turn off travel mode.
Or do you set a time period with no way to turn it back off if you make a mistake? That doesn't sound like a very good idea.
The only way to avoid exposure is to not have social media accounts, or have shell accounts that you log your phone into when you travel. That's your travel mode.
It is still possible to disable Cortana in any version of Windows 10.
Go to http://www.ghacks.net/2016/07/... and scroll down to Does that mean that you cannot turn of Cortana anymore? and you will find instructions to activate the GP template or enter the registry key directly into regedit.
Slashdot Mirror
Until this stuff is regulated as HIPAA medical information, which will dramatically increase the cost, this is a "no-fly zone" for me, and probably should be for you too. Self regulation doesn't cut it. LE requests should have a higher level of scrutiny.
Hi. You should not listen to a thing RT has to say, and I wish Slashdot wouldn't okay articles sourced to them. They are a propaganda/disinformation outlet. I expect to be modded down by Russians now, so mods, I hope you're scanning at -1.
I just bought 2010 for $5. Maybe I paid too much? LOL.
The ending was obvious, and leaving it open to speculation made it art. People need to learn to use their brains. Not everything has a pat answer that someone else has come up with. Sometimes you have to come up with your own answers.
"It's none of your goddamn business what people put in their private messages. Anything else falls under the 4th amendment. Get a court order."
Why is this comment magically at -1? This is what FB is really asking. Is it okay for us to continuously monitor private messaging on our platform?
They just use the "think about the children" loaded question so that you knee-jerk answer "Yes," when the answer should totally be, "If you're providing a private messaging service, then that should remain private. You should comply with any valid search warrant to monitor communications, but we don't do precrime, so we can't just monitor everyone, without a writ."
At least as I understand US law. Other countries may be different. Is precrime a thing in other countries?
I mean, OP might be a little gruff and paranoid, but I don't see any problem with this comment at all that would garner a mod down.
Those people are paid well and trained to not pause when the shit hits the fan. When she fell, it could have been a sniper. They were facing outward to survey the scene.
Mind you, Hillary's imagination about being under fire is breathtaking, but what you saw was SOP, and you don't even have the sense to realize it.
Some people like to call Trump a fascist, and this, potentially nationalizing what now belongs to private industry to serve the body state, is a feature of Mussolini's corporatism (not the usual government by and for the corporations, as it is commonly used, but private industry serving the corporate (body) state).
Now, I know they're talking about Federal ownership like the way the roads are maintained, but do you think a compromise deal between privatization and government ownership might include the beginnings of corporatism? It just might.
Oh... and Ajit Pai is a tool. This actually isn't a bad idea, if the government wants to roll out 5G securely and quickly, but it is a bad idea if private industry winds up being mixed up in co-ownership with the government. That's not a good thing at all.
It seems to me that your annual cost, considering you bought every two years, is doubled. How is that comparable?
The only problem I have with the Quicken subscription is they are charging the full boxed software price, that used to get you three years of download functionality, for every year of the subscription. That's a threefold price increase! I hope they reap what they sow and adjust the price to what a yearly subscription should cost.
...you look like Shackleton!
Start the expedition.
Vaguely more on topic than a lot of what I'm reading here.
The entire episode's "production values" looked like a video game to me, and the writing was just as shallow.
No way I'm paying for an entire, pointless streaming service just to watch COD8: The Final Frontier. I can tune to PewtiePie for that.
And why the hell involve Sarek from canon? Sarek is Spock's dad, not {func_rnd}'s dad when they feel like it.
And I have a program in LISP that I wrote 30 years ago that has been saying the human race won't live past this week, every week, for three decades.
This is proof that we live in a virtual universe, probably written in Brainfuck.
If you aren't involved in credit application activities, get a credit freeze at all three agencies now. Then they will not provide information. Make things difficult for any fraudster.
You can lift the freeze when you need to.
Caveat: It costs money, but it's currently free at Equifax (the page is sometimes cratered, however).
Good luck everyone. And kudos to LifeLock's cracker department (JK).
Maybe we haven't heard from other species because it is physically impossible to bridge the light-years gap. Maybe faster than light information transmission, let alone faster than light travel, is not possible. Maybe intelligent species appear, on-average, hundreds or even thousands of light years away from each other, and the chance of any two species being sufficiently close to overcome the distance problems is astronomically small. Physics seems to suggest that bridging such distances is virtually impossible, why don't we believe it? That would also explain the silence, although it would be a blow to our indomitable technological idealism as a species (especially in the US where we tend to believe there's a tech fix for any problem).
It would also be a blow to the modern analog to believing that the earth is the center of the universe. Who says intelligent life occurs frequently enough that events within a 100-1,000 light-years of each other are common? Our own idealist self-centeredness, that's what. Maybe it happens once in a fucking galaxy on average. Maybe the universe doesn't care if we're a little lonely.
Just throwin' it out there. That's a *lot* of space to traverse for inter-species communication. Maybe nobody's figured it out yet and maybe nobody ever will. Until we have better evidence that we are completely wrong about the severity of that impediment, we should probably be worrying about things that happen here. I don't think we need to come up with science fiction stories (this article isn't about a scientific theory) about how we're destroying ourselves, we appear to be doing so in reality, and we had better overcome it.
Ah. You see what you did there? You presumed the person who is being excluded has been correctly identified as a wrongdoer and, without question, deserves to be excluded. In fact, anyone who gets offended thinks without a doubt that the person who offended them is wrong, but it is not always the case. In fact, there are two sides to every story, not just the story of the offended party.
So basically, we should cater to people who make complaints and never, never question their judgement? Sorry. I don't want to live in that world. It glorifies whiners, and gives the thin-skinned unbelievable power to ruin people's lives.
Not that everyone who complains is a thin-skinned whiner. There are plenty of legitimate complainants. I merely assert that thin-skinned whiners who are in need of personal therapy, not the granting of righteous retribution, exist.
I don't doubt that for a second. I have met completely unreasonable people before. They lurk on all sides of the political spectrum, and they don't deserve this power.
Unfortunately, all dogs will say is "Squirrel!" and "Point!." (Thanks to the Pixar film, UP)
It's both.
Next question.
So the question is, since it's called "Defender," do you need to run their lukewarm, signature-based Defender antivirus to use the EMET features? Because that would be a deal-breaker for me.
Maybe if we decided that companies running server farms must legally be separate entities from the businesses that they serve, but in this case, AWS is run by a major competitor in the retail sphere, and there are definitely security concerns for Wal-Mart because the compute services are being offered by the same company.
Corporate espionage is a thing, and cloud services haven't been around long enough to be properly regulated. We're going to find out all sorts of shady stuff in the coming decades that is being done now, on corporately-owned hardware, and will be illegal later. I have no idea what that shady stuff is, but I expect to read about it in the papers in the next 20-30 years.
Where's Mr. Luddite guy talking about tabs tabbing tabs? I'm disappointed that he couldn't pull the trigger quick enough.
Tabs!
I think people and legal entities will use robots to avoid the robot tax, thus automating it out of existence. Sorry, Bill Gates, we're screwed.
If you are on social media, you are having real-world interactions. The whole idea that our presence via technology is somehow illusory and insubstantial is false. The Internet is the "real world."
That said, to state the obvious, there are a number of non-verbal (heck, even some verbal) cues that are missing from on-line interaction. Sarcasm requires tags. We are still discovering why people can become so awful in text, why they are emboldened to be hateful (beyond just anonymity) when they never would do so in-person. But all of it is real. Those are real words, from real people, unless you're talking to an MS chat bot.
Whatever you see on social media is real people doing real things. Even if they're lying, they're really lying. It is probably better if we all took our on-line presence at least as seriously as we would behave in a bar, even if there is no chance of a fight breaking out. Calling it not the "real-world" keeps us from behaving with responsibility. Reject this false separation of worlds.
Yes. There were transcripts of Flynn talking to the Russian ambassador, so there were wiretaps done on foreign communications. Nobody is questioning whether or not some monitoring of Trump campaign officials was happening.
Nowhere does that say Obama ordered it. Nowhere does it say it was Trump himself that was monitored. It was part of an investigation and done based on evidence with court approval, not some fiat declaration from the dictator-in-chief, which is apparently what Trump supporters think the president is.
The presidency is not a monarchical position. The POTUS does not have king-like powers. One of the things he cannot do, since the Nixon administration, is order a wiretap. Only a court can approve that (including the FISA secret court) and only after an active investigation provides enough evidence to get a warrant.
Get that? Do you have a tape of Obama ordering the tap? No? Then you have nothing. Nor does Trump, by the looks of it.
That's why Comey is out there asking for the Justice Department to repudiate Trump's claim, because it's a bigger lie about the way our formerly stable republic works than it is about Obama. Trump isn't undermining Obama, he's undermining his own government. He is acting like a fifth-columnist, hopefully not wittingly.
Great so you set "travel mode." And then what? Lock it with a different password? The TLA involved will just ask you for the credentials to turn off travel mode.
Or do you set a time period with no way to turn it back off if you make a mistake? That doesn't sound like a very good idea.
The only way to avoid exposure is to not have social media accounts, or have shell accounts that you log your phone into when you travel. That's your travel mode.
It is still possible to disable Cortana in any version of Windows 10.
Go to http://www.ghacks.net/2016/07/... and scroll down to Does that mean that you cannot turn of Cortana anymore? and you will find instructions to activate the GP template or enter the registry key directly into regedit.