I'm all for black listing everything related to AOL.com and all their subsidiaries the day that they put this into effect. After all, there is no guarantee of email delivery now is there?
It's going to be a real fuck up if they actually pull this one off.
I say boycott the hell out of their email delivery. Don't spam them back, just shut them out. I supposed it might be more effective if I got an auto-reply to aol addresses explaining why their email will not be delivered and to contact aol directly if they have a problem with this.
I don't think the Chinese did this because of the US. They would just as easily do this if ICANN was run by the EU. The point is that the government is in control of all the information and weapons that might be used against them. They are tolerated by the people because of their 5,000 years of social culture which permits the population to be governed strictly by the government. This is a far cry from the colonists rebellious culture.
The exposure of the Chinese people to all these non-Chinese ideologies of the internet, democracy, commerce, capitalism, free markets are all pushing conflicts between the government and the society. Regardless of ones personal opinion of what's good and bad regarding the Chinese government, this is a tremendous amount of social change that they are trying to navigate. It's a combination of the Industrial Revolution in Europe, the Social revolution of the 1960's, the Electronic revolution of the 1980's and the Internet revolution in the 1990's all coming to head against a country that has been highly isolated since WWII and the beginning of the cold war. Their culture has been largely agricultural or agrarian in nature for 1,000's of years.
This is a really tricky time for the Chinese government and people. Some day they will probably open up more, but they are trying to contain the social shift to prevent an implosion. 3 Billion people makes for a large famine if their government collapses.
Can't say you are in the minority, but you still check your credit card, don't you?
And if someone does use your card information -- report it as a fraud case to the card owner and they'll back off the charges. Next thing you know, you're not expected to pay the costs -- it's absorbed by the card holding company.
You have an excellent point, but I would label it being a Victim. I think this is just prudent. You don't walk down a dark alley without some expectation that you are entering a situation with a higher than normal probability of becoming a victim of something.
I live in Detroit. In Detroit we have two areas know as Cass Avenue and Woodward and Eight Mile. These places are where all the freaky shit goes on at night. Transvestites park, hookers, dealers, bangers are all pretty well represented in these two locations. Everybody who lives in or near Detroit knows that these are places you stay away from unless you are looking for one of these activities. You might consider these to be "bad places" to go. From my house, it's at least 10 miles as the crow flies to get there.
Over a decade ago companies starting promoting the sale of software designed to limit where you could go on the internet. The idea was to protect your unmonitored children from these "bad places" just like you wouldn't want your children to go to Eight Mile and Woodward.
The difference is that the distance of 10 miles is harder to cover than a mouse click and 10 seconds. But the social experience is the same in either case. You can arrive at a "bad place" and without some street smarts (or e-street smarts) you end up a victim of something "bad".
We check our credit cards and other stuff not for internet transaction fraud, we check it for any fraud. So we have an expectation that any type of transaction/business has the potential of resulting in fraud. But this isn't being a victim of anything. It's a realistic street smart awareness of what happens in the world.
On the flip side of the arguement. How could conduct any business if any resulting theft could result in millions? As a company, you couldn't manage the litigation costs of selling t-shirts over the internet. So, it's acceptable to consider that reasonable efforts and practices exist within a company to at least try. If you can't allow this, then you only hand over money to the lawyers. I have to pay overhead to insurance companies and legal retainers to accomodate risk litigation expenses, real or imagined. I have to port all those costs over to you the consumer.
So how much are you willing to pay for a t-shirt if I also have to sell you a gaurantee that nothing bad will ever happen to your credit card information? What if I can sell it to you for 30% of that cost and ask you to check your credit card for transactions? Even with that gaurantee, you will end up buying the product at 30% my price because it's cheaper and you still have some expectation that my credit information won't be posted on a website within the hour.
OnStar just introduced a product called Turn by Turn that does a voice command driving instructions. Nothing to look at so you can keep looking at the road.
I said over ten years ago that the most important thing that the US government could have done is to socialize the internet connectivity across the country the same way that they have socialized asphalt connectivity by means of Interstate highway systems circa 1930-1940.
Same kind of approach plays in with the Post Office. Everyone gets mail delivery no matter how remote or how dense the population. Not all mail is gauranteed delivered in 3 days but it's delivered.
I think we, as a nation, could have done well to take that stance that everyone will at least have a standardized connection to their homes such that everyone has the capability of getting a modest DSL like connection into their home for a fixed fee (with no trimmings) much like you have garbage collection fees or road maintenance fees from the local government.
What the individual decides to do after this, higher bandwidth, ISP services like portals and email.. can all be managed in the consumer market. But at least you have the road available.
This country experienced huge changes economically and socially as the result of the US Highway infrastructure. I believe that creating an analogy of an internet infrastructure would cause the same kind of impact on this nation. Right now we don't have such a mechanism. The growth of internet businesses and society is at a strangehold based on what you can afford to pay. It's economically restricted.
Hate to sound like a socialist, but sometimes I think there are some things that can be considered best if socialized.
So he should spend $50 a month to download the patches for the software he's already paid for? Talk about a TCO arguement against Microsoft... That's an additionall $600 a year for software security costs.
He can just as easily hit the patch download before dinner and finish it up afterwards. Perhaps some people have a life outside of the keyboard.
You're assuming too much. Yes companies think it saves them money and they like the idea of being able use the web. But not everyone uses it or even likes it. Those that must, go to the libraries. But I agree that it's pretty damn expensive.
Considering that my Broadband costs more than my cell phone bill every month it's a pretty expensive item to afford. It's certainly possible to get by without the broadband connection in this house. For a year I went with dial-up modems and diald without any ill affects. The only real incentive I have for running broadband is that my mail server at home gets less spam than my ISP mail account and I have no desire to deal with that crap every day.
Given a financial crunch in my personal life, broadband is definitely on the short list of things to drop.
Darn it.... For a second you had me thinking you actually had a point.
The problem isn't the OS, even under the best applications.
It ultimately is going to come down to a matter of giving the user the trust to run an application that they download from the internet. And the level of trust that the software accessing the internet will be able to actually identify or moderate the downloading of software for the user.
Today you have dumb people downloading bad programs all the time in forms of bots. None of them will run on my Linux machines because they aren't coded to do so. Similarly, none of my users have any kind of access sufficient that they could cause the machine to be rooted, barring any local security holes themselves. Under this construct, even with an application that is executable on Linux, the execution of that code should or could be considered secure.
Given that is the case today, I think it would suffice if the internet accessing software (ie: mozilla) would guarantee that anything written to the disk is written with a umask (default 022) to prevent anything being downloaded from being arbitrarily downloaded with executable permissions. This isn't a gaurantee but it makes the downloaded applications such that the user must consciously execute the application.
I will never consider the internet secure if there is the possibility that an arbitrary user can unwittingly download and execute application code. That's stupid.
I suppose you could always try the alternative tactic of charging each AOL customer a fee based on your transaction costs plus the overhead to track the costs for each email delivered to AOl in addition to each email send from AOL
But it just occurred to me. AOL won't care. They push BLOGS not LISTS. If everything is on blogs for discussions then there isn't much else to do. That and there's the added plus for AOL in that they can more readily manage your content to make sure you comply with their AUP. You see email can't easily be recalled.
Why don't you go back to the people who made the card and ask them why they changed the chipset without telling anyone about it. Get a fucking clue. Not even the crappy hardware made for Windows works on every version of windows and often times the drivers aren't compatable with hardware made 6 months earlier under the same name.
Quite frankly, I would be more than pleased if you decided to never visit the halls of open source software again. This cry-baby attitude of it doesn't work and it's all their fault pisses me off. I could bore you to tears with the number of times I have purchased hardware product X and have it work 100% perfectly out of the box. Then if I purchase another item of the same model number and SKU 6 months later, it doesn't fucking work worth a damn. Why? Because they changed the chipsets and didn't tell anyone. And if you want support on linux they tell you to push a rope.
BTW, PVR did change their chipset and create a 'broken' version of the card. IIRC you need the one with the number '99' on the lower corner on the back of the box, or something like that. I know if it >99 you are screwed by design of Hauppauge. So go whine to them or stick with Windows but make sure you have the latest drivers or you are still screwed. See, it doesn't change just because it's Linux.
It's the fucking hardware.
If you want it to work, do some research before you buy it. And I mean real research. Find out who else is having trouble with the card, why, and if there is something than can be done about it. Every piece of hardware I buy I check for compatability. Not from the vendor, but from the real world. Especially with PVR cards, Video cards, and web cams.
Are you aware that the chips change on the board and the vendor will never identify that fact? You might check into the possibility that your (older) card is not quite the same as the card specified by SuSE Linux. I see this far too often, especially with PVR and USB devices.
Marketing has a huge affect on the cost of the product. Where I work they had problems getting people to buy the product at the stated price. They had more than enough profit on it to lower the price into a more attainable band. But that's not what they choose to do.
Instead they went on a marketing campaign to educate people that the value of the product is much higher than the current perception. This was hoped to get enough people thinking it was something they needed and something that was affordable. However, they have since lowered the price because the marketing efforts have an effect, but nothing sustainable.
So, sometimes they have to balance the cost/profit but often times they work on a different angle. I'm sure Coke could be a lot cheaper if they dropped their marketing efforts but there's probably problems with that as well.
OK, I get the point. You had a really bad experience with a video card...
I would agree with you some years ago. But the terrain has changed considerably. There is plenty of hardware out there that can run just fine with Linux. But you have to bear in mind you have the same problem with Linux that you have with Macintosh and Windows (in the past). Not everything works with every version of your software.
You really need to consider getting into the practice of verifying the hardware you are going to buy actually works with Linux. And before you start bitching about how you don't do this with Windows... You can't run Macintosh hardware under Windows XP and I'm not sure that you can run Wolfenstein 3D on Windows XP either.
But if you do any homework or just get a little careful about your selection you won't have problem. But there's a lot of cheap crap out there that barely works with Windows and definitely won't work with Linux.
How much will you pay extra for some cause you care about?
How much extra will you pay for something you either don't care about or don't understand or are aware of?
Do you really want to be informed of every social wrong on the planet and given the responsibility to fix all of them with every motion of your body? "Don't drive on that street, it was made with that cheap migrant labor from Mexico." "Don't eat that, the boats they use for catching that seafood uses lead based paints on the hull." "You can't use Shell gasoline, they aren't nice people." "Why aren't you buying American you commie?" "Don't work there, they use Microsoft products on their workstations and they've been convicted and they use those evil H1-B visa people who steal our jobs."
Here's a way to limit their power: stop paying them.
You really need to learn something about capitalism. There is little relationship between the employees and the consumers/customers in a company. How is it that Nike has been accused for many years of running third world sweat shops (as has the rest of the garment industry) and yet the first thing we are concerned with when buying clothes is the cost. There is nothing which will stop this from happening unless it is artificially implimented (government regulations).
Yes, I am aware that TFA said it was before Pearl Harbor. But any fucktard would have known that entering the war was going to happen eventually. To think the US wouldn't was sheer fantasy.
However, prior to what event recently would we have known we were going to be entering a state of war with Iraq? Prior to the discovery of Weapons of Mass Destruction? Well we are all still waiting for that one...
What has been done by the United States and it's allies is clearly wrong. Why they did it is clearly muddled and we won't know if it was the right thing to do for probably another generation.
Wasn't it a few years ago that Microsoft said it was ok to steal their software as long as you were Chinese?
And now eBay says you don't have to pay fees if you are Chinese?
American history used to have Jim Crow laws of segregation. Sonds like some kind of new segregation is forming on the internet.
If someone can afford to give away their product for free, then those of use who are forced to pay the subsidy should really consider boycotting the companies until their price models are brought into a balanced structure.
From Pearl Harbor to 1945 we were also in a declared state of war with the axis nations. We have no such formal declaration of war today.
If we were actually in a state of war then the current white house might have a case for their actions. But to date I'm not aware of any such formal declaration of war being authorized by the US Congress.
The salient point is that you identified these by the use of tools to snoop, not tools to deny.
I think the problem that use corporate tools exerience is that the tools for denial are easier to use than the tools to snoop and creating an exception (like SMTP) is so difficult from a company policy perspective that there now exists many missed opportunities for improvement.
Remarkably, FAVI has thrived in, of all places, France -- a country Mr.
Zobrist describes as the "last Soviet Republic." In a country obsessed
with centralization, and that still produces five-year plans, Mr. Zobrist
has pushed control down to the front lines, where it does the most good.
Friedrich Hayek, the Nobel Prize-winning economist, argued 60 years ago
that decentralized systems would always beat centralized,
command-and-control systems because, in his famous phrase, all important
information is distributed and the "man-on-the-spot" knows best. Thus, no
one person or ministry knows enough to direct resources for an entire
economy. The collapse of the Soviet system underscored his point.
But if central planning has gone out of style as a means of organizing the
economy, it remains far too prevalent as a means of organizing firms. If
Jean-Francois Zobrist can break that mold in France, there must be hope
for workers everywhere who are trapped in the chain of command.
Although he doesn't specifically mention the American corporations specifically, this Soviet system he describes is a pandemic in the American business culture in just about any Corporation that you care to examine. Although this is more general that IT security policies, from this it becomes easy to understand how the IT security policies get made and managed.
Good points. Maybe '6' will be of some use. But the only real difference between Java and the other languages I mentioned is the GUI capability of Java. If that "sucks" as you say, then there is even less outstanding for Java.
I think it was a good idea at the time and may have some useful areas in the future, but I don't believe it's all it's been advertised to be.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm all for black listing everything related to AOL.com and all their subsidiaries the day that they put this into effect. After all, there is no guarantee of email delivery now is there?
It's going to be a real fuck up if they actually pull this one off.
I say boycott the hell out of their email delivery. Don't spam them back, just shut them out. I supposed it might be more effective if I got an auto-reply to aol addresses explaining why their email will not be delivered and to contact aol directly if they have a problem with this.
I don't think the Chinese did this because of the US. They would just as easily do this if ICANN was run by the EU. The point is that the government is in control of all the information and weapons that might be used against them. They are tolerated by the people because of their 5,000 years of social culture which permits the population to be governed strictly by the government. This is a far cry from the colonists rebellious culture.
The exposure of the Chinese people to all these non-Chinese ideologies of the internet, democracy, commerce, capitalism, free markets are all pushing conflicts between the government and the society. Regardless of ones personal opinion of what's good and bad regarding the Chinese government, this is a tremendous amount of social change that they are trying to navigate. It's a combination of the Industrial Revolution in Europe, the Social revolution of the 1960's, the Electronic revolution of the 1980's and the Internet revolution in the 1990's all coming to head against a country that has been highly isolated since WWII and the beginning of the cold war. Their culture has been largely agricultural or agrarian in nature for 1,000's of years.
This is a really tricky time for the Chinese government and people. Some day they will probably open up more, but they are trying to contain the social shift to prevent an implosion. 3 Billion people makes for a large famine if their government collapses.
What mechanism would you suggest using to send someone a new password?
Few mail clients are configured to handle encryption.
Any realistic suggestions on what might be a solution that works for more people than it doesn't?
Can't say you are in the minority, but you still check your credit card, don't you?
And if someone does use your card information -- report it as a fraud case to the card owner and they'll back off the charges. Next thing you know, you're not expected to pay the costs -- it's absorbed by the card holding company.
You have an excellent point, but I would label it being a Victim. I think this is just prudent. You don't walk down a dark alley without some expectation that you are entering a situation with a higher than normal probability of becoming a victim of something.
I live in Detroit. In Detroit we have two areas know as Cass Avenue and Woodward and Eight Mile. These places are where all the freaky shit goes on at night. Transvestites park, hookers, dealers, bangers are all pretty well represented in these two locations. Everybody who lives in or near Detroit knows that these are places you stay away from unless you are looking for one of these activities. You might consider these to be "bad places" to go. From my house, it's at least 10 miles as the crow flies to get there.
Over a decade ago companies starting promoting the sale of software designed to limit where you could go on the internet. The idea was to protect your unmonitored children from these "bad places" just like you wouldn't want your children to go to Eight Mile and Woodward.
The difference is that the distance of 10 miles is harder to cover than a mouse click and 10 seconds. But the social experience is the same in either case. You can arrive at a "bad place" and without some street smarts (or e-street smarts) you end up a victim of something "bad".
We check our credit cards and other stuff not for internet transaction fraud, we check it for any fraud. So we have an expectation that any type of transaction/business has the potential of resulting in fraud. But this isn't being a victim of anything. It's a realistic street smart awareness of what happens in the world.
On the flip side of the arguement. How could conduct any business if any resulting theft could result in millions? As a company, you couldn't manage the litigation costs of selling t-shirts over the internet. So, it's acceptable to consider that reasonable efforts and practices exist within a company to at least try. If you can't allow this, then you only hand over money to the lawyers. I have to pay overhead to insurance companies and legal retainers to accomodate risk litigation expenses, real or imagined. I have to port all those costs over to you the consumer.
So how much are you willing to pay for a t-shirt if I also have to sell you a gaurantee that nothing bad will ever happen to your credit card information? What if I can sell it to you for 30% of that cost and ask you to check your credit card for transactions? Even with that gaurantee, you will end up buying the product at 30% my price because it's cheaper and you still have some expectation that my credit information won't be posted on a website within the hour.
OnStar just introduced a product called Turn by Turn that does a voice command driving instructions. Nothing to look at so you can keep looking at the road.
I said over ten years ago that the most important thing that the US government could have done is to socialize the internet connectivity across the country the same way that they have socialized asphalt connectivity by means of Interstate highway systems circa 1930-1940.
Same kind of approach plays in with the Post Office. Everyone gets mail delivery no matter how remote or how dense the population. Not all mail is gauranteed delivered in 3 days but it's delivered.
I think we, as a nation, could have done well to take that stance that everyone will at least have a standardized connection to their homes such that everyone has the capability of getting a modest DSL like connection into their home for a fixed fee (with no trimmings) much like you have garbage collection fees or road maintenance fees from the local government.
What the individual decides to do after this, higher bandwidth, ISP services like portals and email.. can all be managed in the consumer market. But at least you have the road available.
This country experienced huge changes economically and socially as the result of the US Highway infrastructure. I believe that creating an analogy of an internet infrastructure would cause the same kind of impact on this nation. Right now we don't have such a mechanism. The growth of internet businesses and society is at a strangehold based on what you can afford to pay. It's economically restricted.
Hate to sound like a socialist, but sometimes I think there are some things that can be considered best if socialized.
So he should spend $50 a month to download the patches for the software he's already paid for? Talk about a TCO arguement against Microsoft... That's an additionall $600 a year for software security costs.
He can just as easily hit the patch download before dinner and finish it up afterwards. Perhaps some people have a life outside of the keyboard.
You're assuming too much. Yes companies think it saves them money and they like the idea of being able use the web. But not everyone uses it or even likes it. Those that must, go to the libraries. But I agree that it's pretty damn expensive.
Considering that my Broadband costs more than my cell phone bill every month it's a pretty expensive item to afford. It's certainly possible to get by without the broadband connection in this house. For a year I went with dial-up modems and diald without any ill affects. The only real incentive I have for running broadband is that my mail server at home gets less spam than my ISP mail account and I have no desire to deal with that crap every day.
Given a financial crunch in my personal life, broadband is definitely on the short list of things to drop.
Darn it.... For a second you had me thinking you actually had a point.
The problem isn't the OS, even under the best applications.
It ultimately is going to come down to a matter of giving the user the trust to run an application that they download from the internet. And the level of trust that the software accessing the internet will be able to actually identify or moderate the downloading of software for the user.
Today you have dumb people downloading bad programs all the time in forms of bots. None of them will run on my Linux machines because they aren't coded to do so. Similarly, none of my users have any kind of access sufficient that they could cause the machine to be rooted, barring any local security holes themselves. Under this construct, even with an application that is executable on Linux, the execution of that code should or could be considered secure.
Given that is the case today, I think it would suffice if the internet accessing software (ie: mozilla) would guarantee that anything written to the disk is written with a umask (default 022) to prevent anything being downloaded from being arbitrarily downloaded with executable permissions. This isn't a gaurantee but it makes the downloaded applications such that the user must consciously execute the application.
I will never consider the internet secure if there is the possibility that an arbitrary user can unwittingly download and execute application code. That's stupid.
Agreed.
I suppose you could always try the alternative tactic of charging each AOL customer a fee based on your transaction costs plus the overhead to track the costs for each email delivered to AOl in addition to each email send from AOL
But it just occurred to me. AOL won't care. They push BLOGS not LISTS. If everything is on blogs for discussions then there isn't much else to do. That and there's the added plus for AOL in that they can more readily manage your content to make sure you comply with their AUP. You see email can't easily be recalled.
Bullshit! Pump up the patents as much as you possibly can. Patent air!
It's only through rampant absurdity can you get anyone to recognize that something needs to be done. Otherwise it isn't bad enough.
Why don't you go back to the people who made the card and ask them why they changed the chipset without telling anyone about it. Get a fucking clue. Not even the crappy hardware made for Windows works on every version of windows and often times the drivers aren't compatable with hardware made 6 months earlier under the same name.
Quite frankly, I would be more than pleased if you decided to never visit the halls of open source software again. This cry-baby attitude of it doesn't work and it's all their fault pisses me off. I could bore you to tears with the number of times I have purchased hardware product X and have it work 100% perfectly out of the box. Then if I purchase another item of the same model number and SKU 6 months later, it doesn't fucking work worth a damn. Why? Because they changed the chipsets and didn't tell anyone. And if you want support on linux they tell you to push a rope.
BTW, PVR did change their chipset and create a 'broken' version of the card. IIRC you need the one with the number '99' on the lower corner on the back of the box, or something like that. I know if it >99 you are screwed by design of Hauppauge. So go whine to them or stick with Windows but make sure you have the latest drivers or you are still screwed. See, it doesn't change just because it's Linux.
It's the fucking hardware.
If you want it to work, do some research before you buy it. And I mean real research. Find out who else is having trouble with the card, why, and if there is something than can be done about it. Every piece of hardware I buy I check for compatability. Not from the vendor, but from the real world. Especially with PVR cards, Video cards, and web cams.
Are you aware that the chips change on the board and the vendor will never identify that fact? You might check into the possibility that your (older) card is not quite the same as the card specified by SuSE Linux. I see this far too often, especially with PVR and USB devices.
I think you're almost right.
Marketing has a huge affect on the cost of the product. Where I work they had problems getting people to buy the product at the stated price. They had more than enough profit on it to lower the price into a more attainable band. But that's not what they choose to do.
Instead they went on a marketing campaign to educate people that the value of the product is much higher than the current perception. This was hoped to get enough people thinking it was something they needed and something that was affordable. However, they have since lowered the price because the marketing efforts have an effect, but nothing sustainable.
So, sometimes they have to balance the cost/profit but often times they work on a different angle. I'm sure Coke could be a lot cheaper if they dropped their marketing efforts but there's probably problems with that as well.
OK, I get the point. You had a really bad experience with a video card...
I would agree with you some years ago. But the terrain has changed considerably. There is plenty of hardware out there that can run just fine with Linux. But you have to bear in mind you have the same problem with Linux that you have with Macintosh and Windows (in the past). Not everything works with every version of your software.
You really need to consider getting into the practice of verifying the hardware you are going to buy actually works with Linux. And before you start bitching about how you don't do this with Windows... You can't run Macintosh hardware under Windows XP and I'm not sure that you can run Wolfenstein 3D on Windows XP either.
But if you do any homework or just get a little careful about your selection you won't have problem. But there's a lot of cheap crap out there that barely works with Windows and definitely won't work with Linux.
This was first documented by Jules Verne in 20,000 Leagues under the Sea.
But you will never see the video because Disney owns the rights to it becuase of their movie: 20,000 leagues under the sea.
You just don't get it.
How much will you pay extra for some cause you care about?
How much extra will you pay for something you either don't care about or don't understand or are aware of?
Do you really want to be informed of every social wrong on the planet and given the responsibility to fix all of them with every motion of your body? "Don't drive on that street, it was made with that cheap migrant labor from Mexico." "Don't eat that, the boats they use for catching that seafood uses lead based paints on the hull." "You can't use Shell gasoline, they aren't nice people." "Why aren't you buying American you commie?" "Don't work there, they use Microsoft products on their workstations and they've been convicted and they use those evil H1-B visa people who steal our jobs."
Where are you going to draw the line?
You really need to learn something about capitalism. There is little relationship between the employees and the consumers/customers in a company. How is it that Nike has been accused for many years of running third world sweat shops (as has the rest of the garment industry) and yet the first thing we are concerned with when buying clothes is the cost. There is nothing which will stop this from happening unless it is artificially implimented (government regulations).
But nothing will fix this on it's own.
Yes, I am aware that TFA said it was before Pearl Harbor. But any fucktard would have known that entering the war was going to happen eventually. To think the US wouldn't was sheer fantasy.
However, prior to what event recently would we have known we were going to be entering a state of war with Iraq? Prior to the discovery of Weapons of Mass Destruction? Well we are all still waiting for that one...
What has been done by the United States and it's allies is clearly wrong. Why they did it is clearly muddled and we won't know if it was the right thing to do for probably another generation.
Wasn't it a few years ago that Microsoft said it was ok to steal their software as long as you were Chinese?
And now eBay says you don't have to pay fees if you are Chinese?
American history used to have Jim Crow laws of segregation. Sonds like some kind of new segregation is forming on the internet.
If someone can afford to give away their product for free, then those of use who are forced to pay the subsidy should really consider boycotting the companies until their price models are brought into a balanced structure.
Get a clue. Don't support the browsers. None of them. Don't support the IE series or the Firefox browsers.
Support to a set of standards.
True dat.
From Pearl Harbor to 1945 we were also in a declared state of war with the axis nations. We have no such formal declaration of war today.
If we were actually in a state of war then the current white house might have a case for their actions. But to date I'm not aware of any such formal declaration of war being authorized by the US Congress.
Or did I miss something?
The salient point is that you identified these by the use of tools to snoop, not tools to deny.
I think the problem that use corporate tools exerience is that the tools for denial are easier to use than the tools to snoop and creating an exception (like SMTP) is so difficult from a company policy perspective that there now exists many missed opportunities for improvement.
WSJ posted a great article about a company in France. The point I would like to make with this article is the following quote:
Although he doesn't specifically mention the American corporations specifically, this Soviet system he describes is a pandemic in the American business culture in just about any Corporation that you care to examine. Although this is more general that IT security policies, from this it becomes easy to understand how the IT security policies get made and managed.Good points. Maybe '6' will be of some use. But the only real difference between Java and the other languages I mentioned is the GUI capability of Java. If that "sucks" as you say, then there is even less outstanding for Java.
I think it was a good idea at the time and may have some useful areas in the future, but I don't believe it's all it's been advertised to be.