"Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., for instance, has been a longtime advocate of strict privacy laws to restrict commercial Web sites' data collection practices. In a statement posted on his own Web site, McCain assures visitors that 'I do not use 'cookies' or other means on my Web site to track your visit in any way.' But visiting mccain.senate.gov implants a cookie on the visitor's PC that will not expire until 2035. "
Because, as we all know, all politicians are fully versed in technology and its myriad uses.
This problem can be solved through software already -- the school didn't take necessary means to avoid such a simple "DoS" style attack.
Judging by this quote, it sounds like they don't even really have a grasp on what kind of "attack" it was.
"It's a crime and it is important we take this seriously... especially for school officials... it could have done a tremendous amount of damage," said Canton City Prosecutor Frank Fronchione.
Causing a tremendous amount of damage? WTF? He's not DDoSing Air Traffic Control. What a total load. This kid should sue these jackasses for libel, false arrest, and harassment.
I love the complete bullshit way this article frames the situation. He didn't put a link, he "created a website, which connected to the school's system." ooo.. sinister.. yeah...
MS deserves bashing for the flaw, but there's a difference between an untested one-man release, and the official, QA'd patch. Part of the reason Microsoft couldn't release a patch immediately is because they need to make sure their fix doesn't break snything else.
One of these sites is selling cell phone records for $110 for a month's worth of calls. No court order needed, no credentials required.
That's absolutely stalk-tastic. So, in addition to being able to buy SS#, satellite images of their house, and public property information, we can get phone records now. Sweet.
Anyone want to see what 1-900 numbers Jack Thompson's been calling?
Apple's computers work fine for many people, just like Toshiba's do. There are bad ones in the bunch, but it's not indicative of a shoddy company.
The point everyone is making against the article submitter, is that buying a Mac vs a PC isn't going to magically make you immune to hardware deficiencies.
Bad capacitors are bad capacitors. Bad Ram is bad ram, bad screens are bad screens, and bad drives are bad drives. The commonality in standard components between Macs and PCs is great, and will become even greater now that Macs will have intel silicon inside.
The act of contrasting the vulnerabilities found in the few Windows operating systems with the vulnerabilities found in hundreds of Linux/Unix is bad enough, but when you consider that the Unix/Linux list contains duplicate items, it becomes positively shameful.
It looks like we both posted at the same time. At any rate, you have a point to a certain degree. My post here shows that if you go through the list and subtract out all the items with "updated" after them, Subtract OSX and Solaris, the Linux/Unix group category is about par with windows, not 3x worse.
Whether "different" OSes should be lumped together is another discussion entirely (how "different" are they if they have the same kernel?)
Part of the contention is the repeat entries with the "updated" notation. So if you throw out all 141 "updated" occurrences in the Microsoft section, that leaves 671 (812-141=671).
If you throw out all 1437 "updated" occurences in the linux/unix secion, that leaves 891 (2328-1437=891). Subtracting Apple OS X (130) and Sun Solaris (77), Linux/Unix ends up with 13 more vulnerabilities than Windows (891-130-77=684), but it's for more operating systems, so it may be fair to divide that 684 further.
How are we supposed to trust CNET's ratings now? Shouldn't they review and change their ratings to reflect its true/overall quality?
CNet has started including video reviews that are brief, but usually a pretty good overview of the product. I would ignore the "editor's rating" number, though. I've never found those to be consistent, on any website. If you want an indicator of quality, check the user ratings. Those usually point out any glarinf product deficiencies.
After going through four hard disks, motherboards, power supply daughterboards, and VGA cards in eight repairs during the three-year extended warranty of this piece of junk I'm more than happy to send it back to Toshiba in exchange for a down payment on a new Mac."
Good luck with that Mac. And your upcoming class-action lawsuit trying to get it serviced.
It doesn't even need to be that small - no need to try and cram it all in. Sure, don't make it as big as some of those MS Media Center boxes, but if they made it the same size as a normal DVD player then I think that would be fine for the vast majority of people.
Yeah, but you're forgetting the mentality of most Apple douchebags, which is form-factor-uber-alles.
Just like a prospective employer might not hire you if you can't explain to him what his favorite new buzzword "AJAX" means, and whether you can make it happen...
I'll be able to explain it to him, alright. I'll explain that any idiot that uses the term in serious conversation is a charlatan and shouldn't be trusted with anything more than secretarial duties.
Who's next to inappropriately threaten us with punishment for behavior it doesn't like?
Given that Marquette is a religious school, I don't see why it's so surprising that they're completely opposed to opinions and individual thought. I mean, their whole dogma is based on conformity and compliance without question. WTF do you expect?
"Buzzword" is just another buzzword. Language is a tool for communication, and if it's more effective and efficient to say "AJAX" to one person, while explaining in greater techincal detail your exact meaning to someone else, there's nothing wrong with that. If somebody says "I implemented my site with AJAX" blah blah blah
I will agree with you on one point: There is some usefulness to be had with the term "AJAX." If some idiot refers to an xmlHTTPRequest object as AJAX, I'll know it's time to fire his ignorant ass.
The term was adopted despite its commercial origin, and when you say "AJAX", people who you might *expect* to know what you mean, actually *do* know what you mean. It may be a marketing gimmick, but its status as a commonly used term is now well-established
but that's the thing: for many people, AJAX is just another buzzword. For people "in the know," it's much more efficient to explain what the fuck you're talking about, rather than trying to dazzle them with useless acronyms like "AJAX".
Slashdot Mirror
"Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., for instance, has been a longtime advocate of strict privacy laws to restrict commercial Web sites' data collection practices. In a statement posted on his own Web site, McCain assures visitors that 'I do not use 'cookies' or other means on my Web site to track your visit in any way.' But visiting mccain.senate.gov implants a cookie on the visitor's PC that will not expire until 2035. "
Because, as we all know, all politicians are fully versed in technology and its myriad uses.
"Michael said it was a joke," Forchione said. "We showed him how we deal with this kind of joke."
Yes. They deal with this kind of joke by wasting actual public resources (police, prosecutor, court staff, et cetera). Splendid.
the kid committed a crime, albeit fairly benign, it's a crime nonetheless
Ok, Matlock, what's his "crime"? Show me the law. Seriously.
So if I tell someone to shoot the principal that would be exercising my free speech?
Straw man? Is that you?
This problem can be solved through software already -- the school didn't take necessary means to avoid such a simple "DoS" style attack.
... especially for school officials ... it could have done a tremendous amount of damage," said Canton City Prosecutor Frank Fronchione.
Judging by this quote, it sounds like they don't even really have a grasp on what kind of "attack" it was.
"It's a crime and it is important we take this seriously
Causing a tremendous amount of damage? WTF? He's not DDoSing Air Traffic Control. What a total load. This kid should sue these jackasses for libel, false arrest, and harassment.
I love the complete bullshit way this article frames the situation. He didn't put a link, he "created a website, which connected to the school's system." ooo.. sinister.. yeah...
I didn't RTFA, but FWIW, ODF was nearly FUBAR.
The problem is that within information technology, many users have far too much access and trust than they should truly have.
Yes, which is why we "need" Trusted Computing(tm) which will solve all of our problems.
MS deserves bashing for the flaw, but there's a difference between an untested one-man release, and the official, QA'd patch. Part of the reason Microsoft couldn't release a patch immediately is because they need to make sure their fix doesn't break snything else.
Hopefully the panel will go out and actually try to reproduce his results
Yeah, but then we'll end up with another panel to investigate this panel's cloned cloning claim results. Where will it all end?
I think Scientology's got Clam cloning already worked out.
One of these sites is selling cell phone records for $110 for a month's worth of calls. No court order needed, no credentials required.
That's absolutely stalk-tastic. So, in addition to being able to buy SS#, satellite images of their house, and public property information, we can get phone records now. Sweet.
Anyone want to see what 1-900 numbers Jack Thompson's been calling?
I think the real question is, can someone explain the $600 per share for Google the analysts are predicting? I mean, WTF?
Apple's computers work fine for many people, just like Toshiba's do. There are bad ones in the bunch, but it's not indicative of a shoddy company.
The point everyone is making against the article submitter, is that buying a Mac vs a PC isn't going to magically make you immune to hardware deficiencies.
Bad capacitors are bad capacitors. Bad Ram is bad ram, bad screens are bad screens, and bad drives are bad drives. The commonality in standard components between Macs and PCs is great, and will become even greater now that Macs will have intel silicon inside.
The act of contrasting the vulnerabilities found in the few Windows operating systems with the vulnerabilities found in hundreds of Linux/Unix is bad enough, but when you consider that the Unix/Linux list contains duplicate items, it becomes positively shameful.
It looks like we both posted at the same time. At any rate, you have a point to a certain degree. My post here shows that if you go through the list and subtract out all the items with "updated" after them, Subtract OSX and Solaris, the Linux/Unix group category is about par with windows, not 3x worse.
Whether "different" OSes should be lumped together is another discussion entirely (how "different" are they if they have the same kernel?)
Part of the contention is the repeat entries with the "updated" notation. So if you throw out all 141 "updated" occurrences in the Microsoft section, that leaves 671 (812-141=671).
If you throw out all 1437 "updated" occurences in the linux/unix secion, that leaves 891 (2328-1437=891). Subtracting Apple OS X (130) and Sun Solaris (77), Linux/Unix ends up with 13 more vulnerabilities than Windows (891-130-77=684), but it's for more operating systems, so it may be fair to divide that 684 further.
Did you really have to include the blurb about a new Vendor ?
What, you've never read about the Star-bellied Sneeches?
How are we supposed to trust CNET's ratings now? Shouldn't they review and change their ratings to reflect its true/overall quality?
CNet has started including video reviews that are brief, but usually a pretty good overview of the product. I would ignore the "editor's rating" number, though. I've never found those to be consistent, on any website. If you want an indicator of quality, check the user ratings. Those usually point out any glarinf product deficiencies.
After going through four hard disks, motherboards, power supply daughterboards, and VGA cards in eight repairs during the three-year extended warranty of this piece of junk I'm more than happy to send it back to Toshiba in exchange for a down payment on a new Mac."
Good luck with that Mac. And your upcoming class-action lawsuit trying to get it serviced.
It doesn't even need to be that small - no need to try and cram it all in. Sure, don't make it as big as some of those MS Media Center boxes, but if they made it the same size as a normal DVD player then I think that would be fine for the vast majority of people.
Yeah, but you're forgetting the mentality of most Apple douchebags, which is form-factor-uber-alles.
So I take it you don't want to come work for us on our Web 2.0 project?
:)
Ahh.. now you're just twisting the knife..
Just like a prospective employer might not hire you if you can't explain to him what his favorite new buzzword "AJAX" means, and whether you can make it happen...
I'll be able to explain it to him, alright. I'll explain that any idiot that uses the term in serious conversation is a charlatan and shouldn't be trusted with anything more than secretarial duties.
Who's next to inappropriately threaten us with punishment for behavior it doesn't like?
Given that Marquette is a religious school, I don't see why it's so surprising that they're completely opposed to opinions and individual thought. I mean, their whole dogma is based on conformity and compliance without question. WTF do you expect?
"Buzzword" is just another buzzword. Language is a tool for communication, and if it's more effective and efficient to say "AJAX" to one person, while explaining in greater techincal detail your exact meaning to someone else, there's nothing wrong with that. If somebody says "I implemented my site with AJAX" blah blah blah
I will agree with you on one point: There is some usefulness to be had with the term "AJAX." If some idiot refers to an xmlHTTPRequest object as AJAX, I'll know it's time to fire his ignorant ass.
The term was adopted despite its commercial origin, and when you say "AJAX", people who you might *expect* to know what you mean, actually *do* know what you mean. It may be a marketing gimmick, but its status as a commonly used term is now well-established
but that's the thing: for many people, AJAX is just another buzzword. For people "in the know," it's much more efficient to explain what the fuck you're talking about, rather than trying to dazzle them with useless acronyms like "AJAX".