No, the solution is to not go to grocery stores that scan your driver's license every time you buy beer (I doubt the Mom and Pop stores are gonna shell out the bucks for the scanning equipment), deal in cash rather than using a bank (cause you KNOW they already keep records on you, haha), etc.
I disagree--I felt the article was both too paranoid (esp. the serial flasher, granted there are going to be some screwups but since the information will still be maintained stateside there's no more chance of that happening than there is now) and painfully unaware of the current situation (there are, if I remember correctly from the lecture the courtroom got the last time I went in for a traffic ticket, only four states whose databases are NOT tied so that other states can access your driving/criminal record, but of course the judge didn't say which ones). The really big IF in this article was IF private companies (grocery stores, movie theatres, etc) are willing to pony up the bucks to make sure your ID is really you--somehow I don't see that happening. The rest of the article was what-iffing about what, for the most part, already is.
Yep, they declined to tell officials how many consumers downloaded the patch, but I CAN tell you that the patch is not listed in their top ten downloads (service packs are included in the top ten list, but I don't know if critical updates are. Anyone on the inside know?)
Maybe installing the auto-updater hasn't been stressed because there's a security hole there we don't know about--Joe Schmo's computer downloads what he thinks is a Microsoft-issued update but in reality it's something some hacker has pointed him to instead, runs it, and...oopsie!
This hole also exists in 98, 98SE, and ME. It just hasn't come to light until recently due to the default settings on XP versus the default settings on prior versions. (The default setting on XP is to have UPnP enabled, whereas on previous OSes you had to actually go to a little trouble to open up the hole.) So the little ol' Al-Qaeda dude must have been working there for quite a while. And considering how many Windows computers are out there, it's not surprising that the government would take an interest in this, whether it's Al-Qaeda related or not--this is a BIG screwup on Microsoft's part, it's got the potential to cause more problems than a few bucks in stolen credit card transactions (does YOUR doctor's office have your records on a Windows box? How about your accountant or your attorney?), and it goes way back, which means it's gonna be a beast (probably impossible) to get everyone patched (and what if the patch screws up your computer? It does occasionally happen, no matter how carefully designed the patch is).
It's easier for me to leave my car unlocked, but not as safe. So should we just not tell people that we're leaving their cars unlocked or let them know how to lock them unless they specifically ask how?
Actually, considering recent developments in human cloning, I think Treason (or A Planet Called Treason, depending on how old your copy is) makes an interesting read. It doesn't deal directly with cloning, but some of the issues it brings up re: use of 'extra' body parts makes some fun food for thought.
I showed the pics to one of our guys who does shipping (we manufacture medical equipment whose software runs on laptops we supply) and he busted out laughing as soon as he saw the pic with the "Fragile" sticker. He said he was about to put a fragile sticker on a box one day while the UPS guy (we'll call him Bob, cause that's his real name) was standing there, and Bob stopped him and told him that was a surefire way for it to get there broken. Your package gets special treatment when it's marked "Fragile", it gets repeatedly drop-kicked.
They didn't even point out the best benefit...
on
Virtual Keyboard
·
· Score: 1
next time I spill coke in my keyboard, it'll still work...and I'll never have to take the keys off my keyboard to clean out that strange goop that seems to collect between the keys again...
...but one that would require much more work on the director's/producer's part, would be to have the director/producer create the versions that are more appropriate to children. That way, if the director/producer has a problem with their art being tampered with, they have control over what it's changed to...and give 'em an option to have the PG version be "you can't watch this DVD."
Actually, if you carry a clipboard and act like you know what you're doing, or carry a pizza delivery bag, you can get in just about anywhere. There was an article a few weeks ago
here talking about just that.
One fruit of that promise is in Microsoft's recently released Windows XP operating system, which attempts to improve the security of Passport's sign-on system by moving the authentication out of the browser and embedding it into the operating system. (page 2 of the article)
Oh, goody...we're going to move sensitive information out of a proven hackable browser and into a (not proven, but likely) hackable OS.
This is one of those cases of overextending oneself...I wouldn't trust my plumber to perform my quadruple bypass, either. Maybe it's time for MS to realize that specializing is NOT ALWAYS a bad thing.
I work for a company that makes medical devices. The software used for the interface is written in compiled basic that we run on DOS 6.22. The laptops that are used for the interfaces are 486's with 20 megs of memory. Our entire division is built on creating custom data collection software--we ship about six custom software packages per month, and we generate most of the profits for the company.
Attempts to create a Windows-compatible version of our software have always failed (don't ask me why, I work on the DOS-based stuff, not the Windows-based stuff). Another attempt to go to Windows has been going on for a year and a half unsuccessfully. Meanwhile, we jsut keep plugging along at what has worked for our company for 20 years.
I have to agree--and my personal feeling on it is, if there's not good error handling, it's usually because the tester didn't do a good job of finding errors (whether that tester is the programmer herself or someone else hired to test the software). Natch, if there's no money to hire someone to make sure that the software not only does what it's supposed to do, but also doesn't do what it's NOT supposed to do, there's not going to be much quality control.
There's also not going to be terribly good quality control if the programmer who WROTE the software has to be the same person who TESTS the software. It's just too hard to catch your own mistakes.
They wouldn't kick me out because I'm not a white male.
Discriminating against someone because of ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, etc. (a choice that a person cannot make) is different from discriminating against someone because they don't use the browser the company likes...or because they decide to show up for a job interview with 14 facial piercings, purple hair, etc.
Not that I'm saying that what Microsoft is doing is a good thing--I think it's pretty ridiculous--but your analogy goes way overboard. There's a big difference between banning someone from using a radio to view television and banning someone from eating at a restaurant due to their ethnicity.
Since it's Microsoft's site, they have the right to ban anyone they want from viewing it, using whatever criteria they see fit, including choice of browser (implying that they don't would eliminate virtually all private sites, sites that charge for use, require a password, etc.)--and we as consumers have the right to refuse to do what they want, boycott their website, refuse to buy their products, etc. Rather than relying on the law for regulation, it's smarter for us to vote with our pocketbooks.
Nah, the beauty of disposable 35mm cameras is that I can buy one at the gift shop in the airport in Cincinnati during my layover on the way to Ft. Lauderdale, then wait to get the pics developed when I get to Denver instead of having to make a trip back to where I bought the camera. The only way this'll be a real moneymaker is if some big chain (think Wal-mart, Texaco, etc.) does a nationwide thing and lets you get the prints printed at any location.
Note: After the transition period, eligible Qwest.net Internet Access Customers who have not transitioned their account will automatically be transitioned to MSN Internet Access.
I usually don't have too much problem with most of what Microsoft does, but this is going too far...if I remember correctly, Qwest.net requires a contract, and it looks like customers will be forced to incur the extra expense (hidden charges?) of buying Microsoft software to get use out of their contract.
We checked on the availability before we moved into our new apartment and made the mistake of trusting the rental agent's promise that 'it will be available by the end of the year'. No sign so far of it, and the local DSL and cable modem providers say they have no plans to run it into our apartment complex anytime soon.
Slashdot Mirror
a year ago last September. They don't put the fingerprint on the DL, but I seem to remember them getting a thumbprint (as I said, I could be mistaken)
No, the solution is to not go to grocery stores that scan your driver's license every time you buy beer (I doubt the Mom and Pop stores are gonna shell out the bucks for the scanning equipment), deal in cash rather than using a bank (cause you KNOW they already keep records on you, haha), etc.
I disagree--I felt the article was both too paranoid (esp. the serial flasher, granted there are going to be some screwups but since the information will still be maintained stateside there's no more chance of that happening than there is now) and painfully unaware of the current situation (there are, if I remember correctly from the lecture the courtroom got the last time I went in for a traffic ticket, only four states whose databases are NOT tied so that other states can access your driving/criminal record, but of course the judge didn't say which ones). The really big IF in this article was IF private companies (grocery stores, movie theatres, etc) are willing to pony up the bucks to make sure your ID is really you--somehow I don't see that happening. The rest of the article was what-iffing about what, for the most part, already is.
I'll get off my soapbox now...
Colorado does fingerprinting too, if I recall correctly from last time I got my DL.
I went to the site and got the following error:
Error!
The following errors have occurred:
The maximum number of registered users for the demo version has been surpassed
Current System Time: 01/02/2002 6:59 pm
Use your browser's back button to try again.
Ummm...you're making the assumption there's only one security hole in the OS...I'll bet you five bucks another big one is found within three months :)
Yep, they declined to tell officials how many consumers downloaded the patch, but I CAN tell you that the patch is not listed in their top ten downloads (service packs are included in the top ten list, but I don't know if critical updates are. Anyone on the inside know?)
Maybe installing the auto-updater hasn't been stressed because there's a security hole there we don't know about--Joe Schmo's computer downloads what he thinks is a Microsoft-issued update but in reality it's something some hacker has pointed him to instead, runs it, and...oopsie!
This hole also exists in 98, 98SE, and ME. It just hasn't come to light until recently due to the default settings on XP versus the default settings on prior versions. (The default setting on XP is to have UPnP enabled, whereas on previous OSes you had to actually go to a little trouble to open up the hole.) So the little ol' Al-Qaeda dude must have been working there for quite a while. And considering how many Windows computers are out there, it's not surprising that the government would take an interest in this, whether it's Al-Qaeda related or not--this is a BIG screwup on Microsoft's part, it's got the potential to cause more problems than a few bucks in stolen credit card transactions (does YOUR doctor's office have your records on a Windows box? How about your accountant or your attorney?), and it goes way back, which means it's gonna be a beast (probably impossible) to get everyone patched (and what if the patch screws up your computer? It does occasionally happen, no matter how carefully designed the patch is).
It's easier for me to leave my car unlocked, but not as safe. So should we just not tell people that we're leaving their cars unlocked or let them know how to lock them unless they specifically ask how?
Actually, considering recent developments in human cloning, I think Treason (or A Planet Called Treason, depending on how old your copy is) makes an interesting read. It doesn't deal directly with cloning, but some of the issues it brings up re: use of 'extra' body parts makes some fun food for thought.
I showed the pics to one of our guys who does shipping (we manufacture medical equipment whose software runs on laptops we supply) and he busted out laughing as soon as he saw the pic with the "Fragile" sticker. He said he was about to put a fragile sticker on a box one day while the UPS guy (we'll call him Bob, cause that's his real name) was standing there, and Bob stopped him and told him that was a surefire way for it to get there broken. Your package gets special treatment when it's marked "Fragile", it gets repeatedly drop-kicked.
next time I spill coke in my keyboard, it'll still work...and I'll never have to take the keys off my keyboard to clean out that strange goop that seems to collect between the keys again...
...but one that would require much more work on the director's/producer's part, would be to have the director/producer create the versions that are more appropriate to children. That way, if the director/producer has a problem with their art being tampered with, they have control over what it's changed to...and give 'em an option to have the PG version be "you can't watch this DVD."
Actually, if you carry a clipboard and act like you know what you're doing, or carry a pizza delivery bag, you can get in just about anywhere. There was an article a few weeks ago
here talking about just that.
Uh, I think religion is constitutionally protected...maybe you need to try for a constitutional amendment for your browser choice...
And no, I don't consider religion a 'choice'.
One fruit of that promise is in Microsoft's recently released Windows XP operating system, which attempts to improve the security of Passport's sign-on system by moving the authentication out of the browser and embedding it into the operating system. (page 2 of the article)
Oh, goody...we're going to move sensitive information out of a proven hackable browser and into a (not proven, but likely) hackable OS.
This is one of those cases of overextending oneself...I wouldn't trust my plumber to perform my quadruple bypass, either. Maybe it's time for MS to realize that specializing is NOT ALWAYS a bad thing.
I work for a company that makes medical devices. The software used for the interface is written in compiled basic that we run on DOS 6.22. The laptops that are used for the interfaces are 486's with 20 megs of memory. Our entire division is built on creating custom data collection software--we ship about six custom software packages per month, and we generate most of the profits for the company.
Attempts to create a Windows-compatible version of our software have always failed (don't ask me why, I work on the DOS-based stuff, not the Windows-based stuff). Another attempt to go to Windows has been going on for a year and a half unsuccessfully. Meanwhile, we jsut keep plugging along at what has worked for our company for 20 years.
I have to agree--and my personal feeling on it is, if there's not good error handling, it's usually because the tester didn't do a good job of finding errors (whether that tester is the programmer herself or someone else hired to test the software). Natch, if there's no money to hire someone to make sure that the software not only does what it's supposed to do, but also doesn't do what it's NOT supposed to do, there's not going to be much quality control.
There's also not going to be terribly good quality control if the programmer who WROTE the software has to be the same person who TESTS the software. It's just too hard to catch your own mistakes.
They wouldn't kick me out because I'm not a white male.
Discriminating against someone because of ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, etc. (a choice that a person cannot make) is different from discriminating against someone because they don't use the browser the company likes...or because they decide to show up for a job interview with 14 facial piercings, purple hair, etc.
try contacting them here...
http://www.msn.com/contactus.ashx
Not that I'm saying that what Microsoft is doing is a good thing--I think it's pretty ridiculous--but your analogy goes way overboard. There's a big difference between banning someone from using a radio to view television and banning someone from eating at a restaurant due to their ethnicity.
Since it's Microsoft's site, they have the right to ban anyone they want from viewing it, using whatever criteria they see fit, including choice of browser (implying that they don't would eliminate virtually all private sites, sites that charge for use, require a password, etc.)--and we as consumers have the right to refuse to do what they want, boycott their website, refuse to buy their products, etc. Rather than relying on the law for regulation, it's smarter for us to vote with our pocketbooks.
Or does it seem like Sen Hollings just wants to get SOME kind of technology legislation on the books with his name on it?
Nah, the beauty of disposable 35mm cameras is that I can buy one at the gift shop in the airport in Cincinnati during my layover on the way to Ft. Lauderdale, then wait to get the pics developed when I get to Denver instead of having to make a trip back to where I bought the camera. The only way this'll be a real moneymaker is if some big chain (think Wal-mart, Texaco, etc.) does a nationwide thing and lets you get the prints printed at any location.
Sure, Outlook Express is free...IF you're running Windows...
Because we're forcing you to!
from the faq:
Note: After the transition period, eligible Qwest.net Internet Access Customers who have not transitioned their account will automatically be transitioned to MSN Internet Access.
I usually don't have too much problem with most of what Microsoft does, but this is going too far...if I remember correctly, Qwest.net requires a contract, and it looks like customers will be forced to incur the extra expense (hidden charges?) of buying Microsoft software to get use out of their contract.
We checked on the availability before we moved into our new apartment and made the mistake of trusting the rental agent's promise that 'it will be available by the end of the year'. No sign so far of it, and the local DSL and cable modem providers say they have no plans to run it into our apartment complex anytime soon.