This is true, however, Symantec's corporate AV/Endpoint is still pretty terrible and has been for a while, even if you ignore the ludicrously unreliable uninstall mechanism.
Personally I tend to shill for Sophos in these situations, but that's mostly because I've had very good experiences with their products; I'm sure there are lots of other AV solutions that are just as good for the Windows workplace depending on your needs.
"Religion" in this context is just a means of control; you can't do that because God says so, you must do this because God says so and you can't question God's word so get off Facebook. I'm willing to bet that the Mullahs won't restrict themselves to this "halal" Irannet, no, they'll need to be able to check on all that corrupting, un-islamic content to make sure it's still out there and all corrupty - you know, for the good of the people.
Religion is a tool, it can be used for good or evil, help people or harm them, but in general when people in power get hold of it they move firmly into the "harm" category.
Presumably the money is all sitting in a VM at one of Diebold's datacentres as well?
Who the hell steals an ATM out of the wall to get customer data? You just send out a phishing email and you'll probably get 100x the return without having to blow a bloody wall to pieces and steal what amounts to a large cube of metal.
Also, who the hell was storing any significant customer data on the ATMs in the first place?
Weirdly, I think I'd take Smart Evil over the usual Dumb Evil we have to put up with, at least they probably won't cause as much collateral damage whilst blindly fumbling around trying to rule the world.
To be fair, I don't think there have been any Tea Party protests where the cops have turned up and pepper-sprayed people for having the audacity to sit still - actually, have there been any Tea Party protests at all? I know they've had the odd rally, but I can't think of any actual protests.
Point being, it's not really an apples to apples comparison.
This is the problem with assigning anthropomorphic characteristics to companies; in the context of people, I would rather that someone have the strength of conviction to make and stick with the choice that they believe is right, rather than flip back and forth to fit the prevailing opinion (subject to the original decision having been made with all the facts).
With companies though, it's really not possible for them to ignore things like this because of the likely impact on their business, so while GoDaddy are just shamelessly pretending to drop support for SOPA to vainly try and appease The Internet, they don't really have a choice. Of course, they could have made the right choice in the first place, but they're dicks, so that wasn't going to happen.
Either way, their initial support for SOPA and helping to write it to get themselves immunity from its provisions mean that regardless of their recent actions, there's no way I'd ever give them my business now.
Who exactly is going to be doing this tutoring? Parents with nothing better to do all day, perhaps? Maybe one of the private tutors currently working, of which I'm sure there are plenty to meet demand. What about letting the kids just teach themselves? It's not as if they'll just spend their time screwing around instead of working.
Schools aren't just there because we want to give kids a sub-standard education, they're there because they're the only practical way to provide education to large numbers of children.
Well yes, if you were both dumb enough to declare it on your tax returns as income; or were incredibly unlucky, were investigated by HMRC and they didn't completely screw it up.
This. Seriously. Either stop posting this spam or let us ignore submitters.
I don't give a flying fuck about infoworld at the best of times, but from now on I will be actively recommending that people avoid them and ignore anything they have to say.
I don't know who's paying them to write this nonsense (or who at Infoworld has shares in Apple) but it's gone way beyond the usual level of shoddy journalism that I've come to expect from a lot of/. articles.
If the proponents of this moronic legislation have said (paraphrasing only slightly) "I don't even pretend to understand the technicalities of this law or the arguments against it, but I'm supporting it fully, regardless" then I don't think any opinion from any group is going to help things very much. As depressing as it sounds, I honestly do not believe that there is anything that "the people" can do that will make the slightest difference to whether or not these laws are passed, there's just too much money at stake.
Suggestions on how to fix this, such as this one are all well and good, but they require a massive, sustained public effort over a long time, which will be blocked at every opportunity by the existing lobbyists with a vested interest in the status quo.
In other news: Certificate Authorities who were already half-assing their verification processes, hiding their security breaches and not bothering to secure their internet-facing phpmyadmin installs will continue to do exactly that under the new regime right up to the point that they get caught, just like now.
Any enterprise IT department worthy of continued employment will be running all Windows updates through their own WSUS server anyway and so will be free to leave their XP clients running IE6 if they so desire.
If you've got machines on a domain that aren't properly configured to a) Update automatically from an internally managed WSUS server on a regular basis and b) Set to suppress and/or reschedule automatic restarts out of working hours then frankly you deserve any data loss you get.
If said agreements result in a reduction in the number of increasingly ridiculous, full screen, flashing, animated adverts that people are using, then I don't really have a problem with it.
I'm not against advertising on websites, I'm against advertising on websites that's distracting, breaks up articles, makes noises, slows down page loads, etc.
My only suggestion would be to have the option to turn the feature off pop-up on first install of the addon, so that people are aware of its existence.
That's not a "trickle-down effect", it's just economics. If *I* buy house and want to remodel it, then I might get someone to do it, who will - shock, horror - be paid for it and they might then spend that money on something. That's how our economy works.
The idea that because these people will have lots of (potential) money in the form of Facebook shares means that they're going to spark some kind of economic boom is ludicrous; sure, some of them might go on spending sprees, others will probably invest it, others will keep all their shares in the hope the prices will go higher, but on average it won't make any significant difference to the economy as a whole.
Don't be silly, there's loads of "contacting 'the other side' to get both sides of a story", no matter how valid or useful their point of view might be and, if done properly, without allowing any kind of response after the 'other side' has had their say.
Even better, the GUIs for things like Exchange 2010 allow you to view the CLI commands being used for any of the changes you make, so that you can easily script them, rather than having to try and work out which particular command and property name that checkbox needs.
Nice troll, but the vanilla Android devices (Nexus line) don't ship with the CarrierIQ software, which means that either the handset manufacturers or, much more likely given the US-centric focus, the carriers are responsible for installing it.
Watching the Leveson inquiry over the last couple of weeks has been one of the most depressing things I've ever done; the lowlight was probably former NOTW journalist Paul McMullen saying the following on the subject of privacy:
In 21 years of invading people's privacy I've never actually come across anyone who's been doing any good. Privacy is the space bad people need to do bad things in.
Privacy is evil; it brings out the worst qualities in people.
Privacy is for paedos; fundamentally nobody else needs it.
Basically the papers are full of amoral arseholes (Not just NI papers either, it's clear that the Daily Mail and others have been up to it as well), the Police and the ICO have been shamefully complicit and the government didn't want to look into it in case it upset Murdoch and he told his papers not to support them any more.
Slashdot Mirror
This is true, however, Symantec's corporate AV/Endpoint is still pretty terrible and has been for a while, even if you ignore the ludicrously unreliable uninstall mechanism.
Personally I tend to shill for Sophos in these situations, but that's mostly because I've had very good experiences with their products; I'm sure there are lots of other AV solutions that are just as good for the Windows workplace depending on your needs.
Exchange 2007 RTM build date was December 2006, though the betas/RC would have obviously pre-dated that by a few months.
Is this me stating my opinion as a question while strongly implying that it's a fact?
"Religion" in this context is just a means of control; you can't do that because God says so, you must do this because God says so and you can't question God's word so get off Facebook. I'm willing to bet that the Mullahs won't restrict themselves to this "halal" Irannet, no, they'll need to be able to check on all that corrupting, un-islamic content to make sure it's still out there and all corrupty - you know, for the good of the people.
Religion is a tool, it can be used for good or evil, help people or harm them, but in general when people in power get hold of it they move firmly into the "harm" category.
Presumably the money is all sitting in a VM at one of Diebold's datacentres as well?
Who the hell steals an ATM out of the wall to get customer data? You just send out a phishing email and you'll probably get 100x the return without having to blow a bloody wall to pieces and steal what amounts to a large cube of metal.
Also, who the hell was storing any significant customer data on the ATMs in the first place?
Weirdly, I think I'd take Smart Evil over the usual Dumb Evil we have to put up with, at least they probably won't cause as much collateral damage whilst blindly fumbling around trying to rule the world.
To be fair, I don't think there have been any Tea Party protests where the cops have turned up and pepper-sprayed people for having the audacity to sit still - actually, have there been any Tea Party protests at all? I know they've had the odd rally, but I can't think of any actual protests.
Point being, it's not really an apples to apples comparison.
Is that like a small business owner?
This is the problem with assigning anthropomorphic characteristics to companies; in the context of people, I would rather that someone have the strength of conviction to make and stick with the choice that they believe is right, rather than flip back and forth to fit the prevailing opinion (subject to the original decision having been made with all the facts).
With companies though, it's really not possible for them to ignore things like this because of the likely impact on their business, so while GoDaddy are just shamelessly pretending to drop support for SOPA to vainly try and appease The Internet, they don't really have a choice. Of course, they could have made the right choice in the first place, but they're dicks, so that wasn't going to happen.
Either way, their initial support for SOPA and helping to write it to get themselves immunity from its provisions mean that regardless of their recent actions, there's no way I'd ever give them my business now.
Who exactly is going to be doing this tutoring? Parents with nothing better to do all day, perhaps? Maybe one of the private tutors currently working, of which I'm sure there are plenty to meet demand. What about letting the kids just teach themselves? It's not as if they'll just spend their time screwing around instead of working.
Schools aren't just there because we want to give kids a sub-standard education, they're there because they're the only practical way to provide education to large numbers of children.
Well yes, if you were both dumb enough to declare it on your tax returns as income; or were incredibly unlucky, were investigated by HMRC and they didn't completely screw it up.
This. Seriously. Either stop posting this spam or let us ignore submitters.
I don't give a flying fuck about infoworld at the best of times, but from now on I will be actively recommending that people avoid them and ignore anything they have to say.
I don't know who's paying them to write this nonsense (or who at Infoworld has shares in Apple) but it's gone way beyond the usual level of shoddy journalism that I've come to expect from a lot of /. articles.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AmGJz_37ojoqdFZhYlBhN2hQOGRoN2R0ZGh3VDZlblE&pli=1#gid=0
Whoever posted the article did so with the login as part of the link,
If the proponents of this moronic legislation have said (paraphrasing only slightly) "I don't even pretend to understand the technicalities of this law or the arguments against it, but I'm supporting it fully, regardless" then I don't think any opinion from any group is going to help things very much. As depressing as it sounds, I honestly do not believe that there is anything that "the people" can do that will make the slightest difference to whether or not these laws are passed, there's just too much money at stake.
Suggestions on how to fix this, such as this one are all well and good, but they require a massive, sustained public effort over a long time, which will be blocked at every opportunity by the existing lobbyists with a vested interest in the status quo.
In other news: Certificate Authorities who were already half-assing their verification processes, hiding their security breaches and not bothering to secure their internet-facing phpmyadmin installs will continue to do exactly that under the new regime right up to the point that they get caught, just like now.
Any enterprise IT department worthy of continued employment will be running all Windows updates through their own WSUS server anyway and so will be free to leave their XP clients running IE6 if they so desire.
If you've got machines on a domain that aren't properly configured to a) Update automatically from an internally managed WSUS server on a regular basis and b) Set to suppress and/or reschedule automatic restarts out of working hours then frankly you deserve any data loss you get.
If said agreements result in a reduction in the number of increasingly ridiculous, full screen, flashing, animated adverts that people are using, then I don't really have a problem with it.
I'm not against advertising on websites, I'm against advertising on websites that's distracting, breaks up articles, makes noises, slows down page loads, etc.
My only suggestion would be to have the option to turn the feature off pop-up on first install of the addon, so that people are aware of its existence.
That's not a "trickle-down effect", it's just economics. If *I* buy house and want to remodel it, then I might get someone to do it, who will - shock, horror - be paid for it and they might then spend that money on something. That's how our economy works.
The idea that because these people will have lots of (potential) money in the form of Facebook shares means that they're going to spark some kind of economic boom is ludicrous; sure, some of them might go on spending sprees, others will probably invest it, others will keep all their shares in the hope the prices will go higher, but on average it won't make any significant difference to the economy as a whole.
Don't be silly, there's loads of "contacting 'the other side' to get both sides of a story", no matter how valid or useful their point of view might be and, if done properly, without allowing any kind of response after the 'other side' has had their say.
Even better, the GUIs for things like Exchange 2010 allow you to view the CLI commands being used for any of the changes you make, so that you can easily script them, rather than having to try and work out which particular command and property name that checkbox needs.
Nice troll, but the vanilla Android devices (Nexus line) don't ship with the CarrierIQ software, which means that either the handset manufacturers or, much more likely given the US-centric focus, the carriers are responsible for installing it.
Interestingly, it looks like the "pure" Android phones (i.e the Nexus line) don't ship with CarrierIQ
I still have fond memories of spending my school days playing Granny's Garden on the BBC Micro; that game was bloody hard when you were 8.
Watching the Leveson inquiry over the last couple of weeks has been one of the most depressing things I've ever done; the lowlight was probably former NOTW journalist Paul McMullen saying the following on the subject of privacy:
In 21 years of invading people's privacy I've never actually come across anyone who's been doing any good. Privacy is the space bad people need to do bad things in.
Privacy is evil; it brings out the worst qualities in people.
Privacy is for paedos; fundamentally nobody else needs it.
Basically the papers are full of amoral arseholes (Not just NI papers either, it's clear that the Daily Mail and others have been up to it as well), the Police and the ICO have been shamefully complicit and the government didn't want to look into it in case it upset Murdoch and he told his papers not to support them any more.
Makes you proud to be British really...