So yes, while I could move my email in about ten minutes, and hopefully someone would save the old Usenet archive, the idea that many of the details of the last ten years of my online life would be accessible to anyone with deep enough pockets is more than a little disquieting.
Then you've done something wrong. Google definitely doesn't have many details of my online life of the last 20 years.
What are these fools talking about. Google? I only spend about an hour a day using it. I could go to the library or ask my mate Dave the same questions if it went belly up.
Or you could enter your search into Bing. Or Altavista. Or Clusty. Or Yauba. Or Cuil. Or...
Isn't Chrome Frame under an OSS license? That means, if Google fails, any company or individual can use the code, and if needed also develop it further (or hire someone to do so).
Also, maybe the reason why the ActiveX control isn't maintained any more is exactly because of Google Frame. So if Google Frame gets unavailable for whatever reason, who tells you that the ActiveX control won't get a new life?
If you don't usually buy luxury goods, but then suddenly buy a dozen Rolex watches, your claim that it wasn't you is very credible. If you buy a dozen Rolex watches every few weeks, there's much less reason to believe you that those twelve Rolex watches were not bought by you.
I think this should be solvable with a little bit of public key cryptography.
First, the issuing company has its own public/private key pair. The private key never leaves the company, the public key gets installed on all terminals.
When issuing a card, a new public/private key combination as well as the PIN is generated. The public key is signed with the company's private key. The PIN is used as password to encrypt the private key with some symmetric cipher. Both the certificate and the encrypted private key are stored on the card. Also, the card's number as stored on the card gets signed with the card's private key, and then this full package gets signed with the company's private key (so the company key certifies that the card's key indeed belongs to that card's number). Also, the issuing company stores a copy of the card's public key on its servers.
Now at a transaction, first the card authenticates itself by sending its card number and the signed public key. The terminal checks the company signature, and therefore can be sure that it's really a key created by the manufacturer. It also tests the signature on the card number, so it sees that the key really belongs to the card. Then it sends the sales information and the entered PIN to the card. The card uses the PIN to get the card's own private key, and then signs the token using that private key and sends back the result. The terminal checks the signature, so it can see that the card indeed knows the private key, which it only can if the PIN was right. The signed sales information is then used for charging the credit card. When the credit card company receives the sales information, it can check the signatures against its copy of the corresponding public key, and therefore verify that the sale was authorized.
You forgot to weight the numbers by the number of people driving/flying.
For example, if you take absolute numbers, you'll find that only 14 people died in a Space Shuttle in 33 years, that is, on average less than half a death per year. By comparing absolute numbers, you'd conclude that the Space Shuttle is 2 million times safer than a car. However if you look at the relative numbers, you'll find that you have a chance of about 1.5% to get killed in a Space Shuttle flight. Now imagine the same fatality rate in cars.
According to that argumentation, a photo isn't obscene either. It's just color blobs arranged on a two-dimensional surface. It doesn't become obscene material until the human perception system assembles it into something that appears obscene.
FB & Twitter is (wisely) seen as a way for workers to communicate with each other
If I had a company, I'd prefer if the employees communicate with each other over company-owned services while in the company. After all, there's always the danger that information accidentally gets outside that isn't supposed to. A service used primarily for outside communication is less dangerous in that respect, because there people won't accidentally communicate internal stuff.
That doesn't tell you what it knows about you. It tells you what data is associated with your Google account. I'm pretty sure it doesn't tell you the data mined through doubleclick ads, for example (I can't check that, because I don't have a Google account; but then, thanks to AdBlock Plus there should not be too much data anyway).
And then when a new disease comes along, our immune system is not properly trained, and we'll die.
Remember that the native Americans dies from illnesses which were relatively harmless for the Europeans, because they just didn't have all those illnesses there.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, but as Porsche has found out, flies work much better than hamsters.
It depends. Is is a schoolbook about science, or about religion?
Then you've done something wrong. Google definitely doesn't have many details of my online life of the last 20 years.
Or you could enter your search into Bing. Or Altavista. Or Clusty. Or Yauba. Or Cuil. Or ...
But Google's size is 10^100 - how could something that big fail?
Isn't Chrome Frame under an OSS license? That means, if Google fails, any company or individual can use the code, and if needed also develop it further (or hire someone to do so).
Also, maybe the reason why the ActiveX control isn't maintained any more is exactly because of Google Frame. So if Google Frame gets unavailable for whatever reason, who tells you that the ActiveX control won't get a new life?
Simple:
If you don't usually buy luxury goods, but then suddenly buy a dozen Rolex watches, your claim that it wasn't you is very credible. If you buy a dozen Rolex watches every few weeks, there's much less reason to believe you that those twelve Rolex watches were not bought by you.
I think this should be solvable with a little bit of public key cryptography.
First, the issuing company has its own public/private key pair. The private key never leaves the company, the public key gets installed on all terminals.
When issuing a card, a new public/private key combination as well as the PIN is generated. The public key is signed with the company's private key. The PIN is used as password to encrypt the private key with some symmetric cipher. Both the certificate and the encrypted private key are stored on the card. Also, the card's number as stored on the card gets signed with the card's private key, and then this full package gets signed with the company's private key (so the company key certifies that the card's key indeed belongs to that card's number). Also, the issuing company stores a copy of the card's public key on its servers.
Now at a transaction, first the card authenticates itself by sending its card number and the signed public key. The terminal checks the company signature, and therefore can be sure that it's really a key created by the manufacturer. It also tests the signature on the card number, so it sees that the key really belongs to the card. Then it sends the sales information and the entered PIN to the card. The card uses the PIN to get the card's own private key, and then signs the token using that private key and sends back the result. The terminal checks the signature, so it can see that the card indeed knows the private key, which it only can if the PIN was right. The signed sales information is then used for charging the credit card. When the credit card company receives the sales information, it can check the signatures against its copy of the corresponding public key, and therefore verify that the sale was authorized.
You forgot to weight the numbers by the number of people driving/flying.
For example, if you take absolute numbers, you'll find that only 14 people died in a Space Shuttle in 33 years, that is, on average less than half a death per year. By comparing absolute numbers, you'd conclude that the Space Shuttle is 2 million times safer than a car. However if you look at the relative numbers, you'll find that you have a chance of about 1.5% to get killed in a Space Shuttle flight. Now imagine the same fatality rate in cars.
Bribe isn't illegal?
In other words: Never moderate from behind a firewall where someone else might be posting as AC.
I don't think that posting anonymously undoes your moderation...
If you are logged in and use the "post anonymous" option, it does. At least it did back when I tried it; it might have changed in the mean time.
They probably think of this type of trust, where the managed property is your opinion, and the government manages it.
According to that argumentation, a photo isn't obscene either. It's just color blobs arranged on a two-dimensional surface. It doesn't become obscene material until the human perception system assembles it into something that appears obscene.
Maybe they just recognized that those "friends" usually aren't.
If I had a company, I'd prefer if the employees communicate with each other over company-owned services while in the company. After all, there's always the danger that information accidentally gets outside that isn't supposed to. A service used primarily for outside communication is less dangerous in that respect, because there people won't accidentally communicate internal stuff.
That doesn't tell you what it knows about you. It tells you what data is associated with your Google account. I'm pretty sure it doesn't tell you the data mined through doubleclick ads, for example (I can't check that, because I don't have a Google account; but then, thanks to AdBlock Plus there should not be too much data anyway).
You described how Windows warns the user. I asked how Windows warns the battery, as the summary text claims.
Or in short: Whoosh!
"tfosorciM" and "renwo potpal"? :-)
So what does it tell them? "Hey, you seem to be failing. Do you need me to help you?"
Lets cure all natural causes of death through the miracle of modern science.
Then starve to death as the world becomes grossly overpopulated.
Don't worry. The human race is so effective at killing each other that most people won't starve anyway.
And then when a new disease comes along, our immune system is not properly trained, and we'll die.
Remember that the native Americans dies from illnesses which were relatively harmless for the Europeans, because they just didn't have all those illnesses there.
I'm still waiting for my future self to come with the construction plans for the time machine. He's already long overdue!
Conclusion: The expected time is infinite. Because only infinity doesn't change if you add some finite amount to it.
...if the programmers started eating less, exercising and losing weight they could be back on the track to being agile?
Well, the story told how agile programming failed. Therefore the message is: more pizza!