I have my doubts that our current programs are really that ineffective. When they take someone who doesn't fit any profile and send them through knowing that if they get caught they are authorized to do what they are doing, it's different than a real world threat scenario. I'd love for them to reduce wasted time and money and I would hope budget cuts will trim them down over time. I'm not hopeful that public opinion is going to make much difference in their approach up until the point that it starts to affect the number of people traveling. I'd bet if ticket sales declined they would respond to that, but so far everyone just adapts and tolerates their invasive stupidity.
That's where I'm afraid we are headed. Credit scoring should not include subjective non-financial personal information. Exactly because it's a slippery slope. You can find a statistical basis to tie all sorts of random data to likeliness to repay debt, but it doesn't mean that correlation is always present. We should stick to actual non-subjective financially relevant facts.
Imagine someone owned a drug rehab center and they discussed their work on Facebook. Should that person have their credit harmed because they use too many red flagged keywords in their posts? Big Data has huge risks in being able to make associations that may be entirely meaningless without context.
Yes, that's why I wish people would stop publicizing their failures. After the initial reports came out a while back the security lines got noticeably slower. If they are ineffective, then fine, but if you tell everyone they are ineffective then "something must be done" and it just makes things worse. I'm comfortable with risk, but I'm not comfortable wasting hours of my life at the airport.
This is to me the fundamental flaw in America's notion of democracy. We have all these guards at the gates to filter out who is allowed to have a legitimate shot at being considered for office. The blame lands on both the party leadership on both sides and with the news media. They all conspire to maintain control and to make sure the American people do not truly have free will in the election choices. I really hope the day comes soon that the American people stand up and demand more than the illusion of choice. I hope we stand up and demand more than our pick of the rubber stamped celebrity politicians who have enough name recognition to walk in with good poll numbers before the race has even begun. I'd like to see the news media try some actual journalism and show us the details of the relevant candidates rather than just shoveling more from the constant flow of pseudo news of the life and times of the most interesting celebrity candidates.
As much as we harp on NSA abuses what they do to the average person pales in comparison to how far up your ass with a flashlight corporations and allowed to go with just a check mark in the terms of service acceptance check box. I really feel PAID services should be required to offer a disagree check box that still allows you to purchase service while giving the provider zero rights to tread on your privacy. That of course would not stop data brokers from collecting info on everyone since they don't need consent to put their tentacles into every available data source to collect and share information about you. The TLAs have nothing on the ability of private enterprise to collect mass intelligence.
You're right, free will is much too dangerous. We should have a lot of rules and laws and when we should never act on our own instincts and use our own judgement in defending ourselves our homes or our rights. Either that, or we should have the ability to protect our rights without hesitation or apology. If someone gets hurt then the party causing injury can suffer the consequences. We shouldn't proactively prevent people from taking action because we fear our citizens ability to make prudent and rational decisions and face the consequences of their own choices.
Didn't they ban the sale of Ephedra also? I used to get weight loss smoothie powder from GNC with Ephedra back in the 90s. I think the FDA banned it due to people supposedly having cardiac events. It seems to be banned from sale as a nutritional supplement in the U.S., but I'm not sure how that affects the ability to grow it privately.
The real purpose of the study is to find alternatives to waterboarding at Gitmo, but so far prisoners don't seem to be all that bothered by marbles or fox odor. Hopes were high when 96% of mice tested eventually admitted to having ties to extremist factions.
The clear solution is to send the male child to a labor camp so that the female child can get her fair share of computer time. I'm afraid there is no other way.
Why is Obama so hell bent on passing this? I can understand how this would be popular with corporations and some legislators, but why in his second and final term is Obama bent on passing this seriously flawed bunch of shit?
That would be a seriously good start. Once there I'd just ask for more safeguards against malware and invasive tracking. If I visit a site, the site operator in my mind is ethically responsible for assuring any ads presented do not contain malicious code.
There isn't a secure way to access fifteen different content providers and freely run scripts provided by all of them every time you visit a page and with zero knowledge of what content or what provider will be accessed when you open a page.
I don't avoid adds because they are annoying. I avoid them because when I visit a website I'm saying a trust that website enough to interact with it. I have no such trust in blindly accepting all advertiser interaction. When the website I'm accessing brings the ads in house and takes complete ethical and legal responsibility for the safety and privacy implications of ad content then, I may be happy to allow their ads to load. My security trumps their ad revenue.
WTF would possess anyone to complain to the FCC about Big Bang Theory, not the network, but the FCC, fucking seriously? Those complaints should go directly to the garbage bin, because anyone who writes one is clearly too stupid to be allowed to have the means of communicating with other humans.
The show is OK, but isn't really for geeks and none of the characters are much like any geek I've ever known. I always wonder, does the Sheldon character like Windows and Microsoft because they get a kickback? I find it implausible that his character would be not just a user, but a true MSFT fan.
We are going Chip-and-Signature in the U.S., but if we were going Chip-and-PIN it could shift liability to the cardholder. Chip-and-PIN is thought to be secure, so the presumption of innocence may not hold as it does today.
See quote below from Jonathan E. Jaffe posted on Krebsonsecurity.com: "Take a look under the May 2014 section of http://nc3.mobi/references/emv... on what is happening in Europe under EMV. That page has lots of links, but here is the relevant text. Change in Presumption of Innocence An article in The Register (whose slogan is Biting the hand that feeds IT) is rather critical of chip-and-pin citing established weaknesses and some new ones referred to in the new paper Chip and Skim: cloning EMV cards with the pre-play attack from the Computer Laboratory, University of Cambridge, UK (16 page PDF) presented at the 2014 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy in San Jose, California 5/19/2014. In this paper paper it is worth looking at the change in what we call presumption of innocence as it describes the case of a Mr Gambin, "who was refused a refund for a series of transactions that were billed to his card and which HSBC [ his bank ] claimed must have been made with his card and PIN at an ATM in Palma, Majorca on the 29th June 2011. In such cases we advise the fraud victim to demand the transaction logs from the bank. In many cases the banks refuse, or even delete logs during the dispute process, leaving customers to argue about generalities." [ The bank deleted the evidence that would have shown the fraud. highlighting ours, see right column page one of the 16 page PDF -ed]"
Companies think good IT people are expensive, but really they are not expensive when you account for the efficiency and productivity they enable and the cost of the outages and security breaches a company could have had without good people who are sufficiently empowered.
On that note, I'm concerned that knowing there is some wanker watching with spy goggles might interfere with a lady's willingness to fulfill the odd request for a mid-cinema blowjob.
Slashdot Mirror
I have my doubts that our current programs are really that ineffective. When they take someone who doesn't fit any profile and send them through knowing that if they get caught they are authorized to do what they are doing, it's different than a real world threat scenario. I'd love for them to reduce wasted time and money and I would hope budget cuts will trim them down over time. I'm not hopeful that public opinion is going to make much difference in their approach up until the point that it starts to affect the number of people traveling. I'd bet if ticket sales declined they would respond to that, but so far everyone just adapts and tolerates their invasive stupidity.
That's why I only use Gmail to feed Google self promoting propaganda.
Google: Would you like us to read your email and generate automatic responses?
Me: Go fuck yourself.
Google: I knew you were going to say that.
That's where I'm afraid we are headed. Credit scoring should not include subjective non-financial personal information. Exactly because it's a slippery slope. You can find a statistical basis to tie all sorts of random data to likeliness to repay debt, but it doesn't mean that correlation is always present. We should stick to actual non-subjective financially relevant facts.
Imagine someone owned a drug rehab center and they discussed their work on Facebook. Should that person have their credit harmed because they use too many red flagged keywords in their posts? Big Data has huge risks in being able to make associations that may be entirely meaningless without context.
Yes, that's why I wish people would stop publicizing their failures. After the initial reports came out a while back the security lines got noticeably slower. If they are ineffective, then fine, but if you tell everyone they are ineffective then "something must be done" and it just makes things worse. I'm comfortable with risk, but I'm not comfortable wasting hours of my life at the airport.
This is to me the fundamental flaw in America's notion of democracy. We have all these guards at the gates to filter out who is allowed to have a legitimate shot at being considered for office. The blame lands on both the party leadership on both sides and with the news media. They all conspire to maintain control and to make sure the American people do not truly have free will in the election choices. I really hope the day comes soon that the American people stand up and demand more than the illusion of choice. I hope we stand up and demand more than our pick of the rubber stamped celebrity politicians who have enough name recognition to walk in with good poll numbers before the race has even begun. I'd like to see the news media try some actual journalism and show us the details of the relevant candidates rather than just shoveling more from the constant flow of pseudo news of the life and times of the most interesting celebrity candidates.
That's funny, when I start making things out of steel wool it's usually after I take the the drugs.
As much as we harp on NSA abuses what they do to the average person pales in comparison to how far up your ass with a flashlight corporations and allowed to go with just a check mark in the terms of service acceptance check box. I really feel PAID services should be required to offer a disagree check box that still allows you to purchase service while giving the provider zero rights to tread on your privacy. That of course would not stop data brokers from collecting info on everyone since they don't need consent to put their tentacles into every available data source to collect and share information about you. The TLAs have nothing on the ability of private enterprise to collect mass intelligence.
You're right, free will is much too dangerous. We should have a lot of rules and laws and when we should never act on our own instincts and use our own judgement in defending ourselves our homes or our rights. Either that, or we should have the ability to protect our rights without hesitation or apology. If someone gets hurt then the party causing injury can suffer the consequences. We shouldn't proactively prevent people from taking action because we fear our citizens ability to make prudent and rational decisions and face the consequences of their own choices.
Didn't they ban the sale of Ephedra also? I used to get weight loss smoothie powder from GNC with Ephedra back in the 90s. I think the FDA banned it due to people supposedly having cardiac events. It seems to be banned from sale as a nutritional supplement in the U.S., but I'm not sure how that affects the ability to grow it privately.
The real purpose of the study is to find alternatives to waterboarding at Gitmo, but so far prisoners don't seem to be all that bothered by marbles or fox odor. Hopes were high when 96% of mice tested eventually admitted to having ties to extremist factions.
The clear solution is to send the male child to a labor camp so that the female child can get her fair share of computer time. I'm afraid there is no other way.
Why is Obama so hell bent on passing this? I can understand how this would be popular with corporations and some legislators, but why in his second and final term is Obama bent on passing this seriously flawed bunch of shit?
Lemons?
I would hire a black person, I would hire a woman, I would hire a latino, I would never hire a SJW.
That would be a seriously good start. Once there I'd just ask for more safeguards against malware and invasive tracking. If I visit a site, the site operator in my mind is ethically responsible for assuring any ads presented do not contain malicious code.
There isn't a secure way to access fifteen different content providers and freely run scripts provided by all of them every time you visit a page and with zero knowledge of what content or what provider will be accessed when you open a page.
I don't avoid adds because they are annoying. I avoid them because when I visit a website I'm saying a trust that website enough to interact with it. I have no such trust in blindly accepting all advertiser interaction. When the website I'm accessing brings the ads in house and takes complete ethical and legal responsibility for the safety and privacy implications of ad content then, I may be happy to allow their ads to load. My security trumps their ad revenue.
No...It's the month that cloud computing finally jumps the shark.
Does cannibalism count as a carbon offset?
They just have to wait for some event that triggers an increase in the fear index.
Step 1) Scare the bejeezus out of the citizenry.
Step 2) Legislate
Step 3) Repeat step 1 as needed.
President Obama, your lack of respect for individual rights and freedoms has been my greatest disappointment during your administration.
WTF would possess anyone to complain to the FCC about Big Bang Theory, not the network, but the FCC, fucking seriously? Those complaints should go directly to the garbage bin, because anyone who writes one is clearly too stupid to be allowed to have the means of communicating with other humans.
The show is OK, but isn't really for geeks and none of the characters are much like any geek I've ever known. I always wonder, does the Sheldon character like Windows and Microsoft because they get a kickback? I find it implausible that his character would be not just a user, but a true MSFT fan.
We are going Chip-and-Signature in the U.S., but if we were going Chip-and-PIN it could shift liability to the cardholder. Chip-and-PIN is thought to be secure, so the presumption of innocence may not hold as it does today.
See quote below from Jonathan E. Jaffe posted on Krebsonsecurity.com:
"Take a look under the May 2014 section of http://nc3.mobi/references/emv... on what is happening in Europe under EMV. That page has lots of links, but here is the relevant text.
Change in Presumption of Innocence
An article in The Register (whose slogan is Biting the hand that feeds IT) is rather critical of chip-and-pin citing established weaknesses and some new ones referred to in the new paper Chip and Skim: cloning EMV cards with the pre-play attack from the Computer Laboratory, University of Cambridge, UK (16 page PDF) presented at the 2014 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy in San Jose, California 5/19/2014.
In this paper paper it is worth looking at the change in what we call presumption of innocence as it describes the case of a Mr Gambin, "who was refused a refund for a series of transactions that were billed to his card and which HSBC [ his bank ] claimed must have been made with his card and PIN at an ATM in Palma, Majorca on the 29th June 2011. In such cases we advise the fraud victim to demand the transaction logs from the bank. In many cases the banks refuse, or even delete logs during the dispute process, leaving customers to argue about generalities." [ The bank deleted the evidence that would have shown the fraud. highlighting ours, see right column page one of the 16 page PDF -ed]"
Companies think good IT people are expensive, but really they are not expensive when you account for the efficiency and productivity they enable and the cost of the outages and security breaches a company could have had without good people who are sufficiently empowered.
On that note, I'm concerned that knowing there is some wanker watching with spy goggles might interfere with a lady's willingness to fulfill the odd request for a mid-cinema blowjob.