Not necessarily. Sometimes social engineering takes advantage of people's assumptions. If you wear a printer servicing uniform and people assume that you're there to fix a printer, are you lying or deceiving them? I'd posit that their assumptions are incorrect and you're not deceiving them unless you're challenged and you start lying.
Bullshit, of course you're deceiving them. You cannot expect normal human beings to question all their assumptions 24/7. Every time you blinked you'd have to prove to yourself that the whole universe hadn't just been switched off and then instantaneously recreated itself.
True story, I once walked into an Apple store wearing a blue shirt. As luck would have it - it looked pretty damn close to the blue shirts that all the "Geniuses" were wearing that day. Once inside the store, I was bombarded by a constant stream of people asking me technical questions - which it just so happens that I'm good at answering! ^_^
I didn't deliberately choose to wear a blue shirt that day - it was just the luck of the draw. Did I deceive anyone in this case??
Social engineering can take on many forms.
Yes, yes you are deceiving people.
Someone comes in and says, "I need help with this." They are assuming that you are an Apple employee, and since you did not correct them, and you KNEW, or at least had a pretty reasonable certainty that they considered you an employee, you are deceiving them.
Now imagine the advice you gave backfired. The customer comes back and says, "Your genius said I should do this, and now my device is bricked. I demand a new one!" After someone back and forth they discover that you were not an employee, but your attire and your attitude convinced them you were. And since the customer did something that bricked the device, and it was not under the advice of a true Apple employee, the warranty is void. Or at the very least, Apple is off the hook and can choose whether or not to fix the problem.
It would have been simple to say, "Yes, I can try helping you with the problem. But just for the record, I am not an Apple Genius," for the sake of clarity and remove any possibility of deception.
There is no big grand conspiracy of evil marketing people versus the grand world of computer people.
1G = 10^9 in every area.
1Gbit/s = 1e9 bits per second (noone complains) 1GHz = 1e9 cycles per second (noone complains) 1GT/s = 1e9 transfers per second (noone complaines) 1GB = 1e9 bytes (oh the horror! the evil marketing oh woe woe woe)
The difference is simple; everything else the consumer takes on faith, but the hard drive is something quantifiable. No one is going to use an oscilloscope to double check the speed of the CPU. Nor can can they exactly check the throughput to be exactly 1GB as the numbers flux enough to cover the difference. Even memory is always abstracted enough that people can never be sure what the exact count is.
But any one can check the properties of a hard drive and see that what was labeled as 1GB is really 1GiB. As noted in someone else's post, once you start reaching Gigas, Teras, and Petas, the percent difference between the two scales is quite noticeable.
That's why woe--I can "see" the difference in this format.
You can't fire him. He's a 5-line perl script. All you can do is file bug reports.
Since the article is all about counting and picking nits.. Do you mean 5 lines as in 5 statements/commands, or 5 lines as in a script with 5 carriage returns/line feeds? Or should this be tomorrows article?
"Hack" #1: So that I'm not tethered to a wall outlet, or go off the grid, I stay up late so I can manually swap out batteries and wear out the plastic clips that holds them in. Assuming I own a phone that has changeable batteries. Better solution #1: Buy a universal external battery charger which is usually a small box that can easily fit in your pocket with a 9-volt battery and a charging cable.
"Hack" #2: Empty an entire bookcase of books, buy a bulky and expensive holding bracket, and jury-rig the whole thing together just so I can watch a movie that I may or may not even enjoy. But at least I put some of those books to good use as a counter-balance. Although I hope I don't sit up quickly in bed and headbutt my expensive tablet. Better solution #2a: Read one of the books on my bookcase. When tired, or when I have stopped enjoying it, put it down. Plus now I can get out of bed much easier. Better solution #2b: If I really need to watch movies at night, but a $20 goose-neck lamp and use some bent coat hangers to suspend the tablet. Or if I don't like the movie, take the coat hanger bracket off, and use the lamp to be a bedside lamp so I can read a book. See #2a.
"Hack" #3: Buy milk crates (hey another place I can put all those books I displaced and don't read), and attach failed device from "Hack" #2. Better solution #3a: Use a portable music player and listen to music or listen to an audio book. Better solution #3b: Using a bungee cord and a decorative plate holder, and place the tablet over the console. You don't really need to watch the clock. Better solution #3c: Buy a sheet music holder (under $40 for even an expensive one) and place it just in from of the elliptical. It collapses down much more compact than 4-5 milk crates.
Depending on what is being deleted, I flip-flop back and forth between commenting out chunks for a revision or two and then deleting, and just deleting. For small sections, I tend to just straight delete. In rare circumstances I'll delete but replace the code with a comment like "Used to do X here, but now it's covered by Y" but only until Y becomes the standard and then those tend to drop off.
For larger sections or whole functions I tend to comment out first until I'm sure the new code is working then deleting it. There are a few reasons behind this: 1) There is an advantage to having the old code instantly available (no diffs, no downloading to a separate directory, etc) to make sure that all the functionality that was previous there is still in the new code. It's very nice to go back and look when the new code isn't working right to flow through the old code and see what's missing. "Oh, we used to set this flag, but when I optimized I did away with it. Apparently, someone is using it much later in the code. Guess I need to put it back." *
2) There is a standard of, when creating new database functions (a new table), that there be a set of default functions; Create the table, Load Defaults (if applicable), Insert a record, Update a record, Load a record, and Delete a record. But as time goes by developers may create more specialized versions of these functions (JOINing other key tables, for example). More updates and soon no one is using the regular functions as the specialized ones work for what they need and then some. So if I see a function not being used any more I comment it out saying, "Deprecated; try using FunctionName() instead." If nothing breaks immediately, and no one complains for a few revisions, the extra functions go away.
* The better, but not real-world, solution would be contact whoever maintains the code that used the flag and see if we can they can update/optimize the code to work without the flag.
Seriously. If it takes me 10 minutes to read and understand it, then it take me 10 minutes to read and understand it. The fact that millions of other people are doing the same thing holds no value other than Adobe is wasting our time.
To watch (and understand?) an episode of Seinfeld takes 22 minutes. There were 180 episodes. With a made up average of 50 million people watched those episodes. That means that I'm creating a really big number but with no actual value other than all of humanity wasted a lot of time watching "nothing" and as I type this you should be reading it in a louder and louder, more excited voice until I finally end the sentence where I'm practically yelling in an effort to make this seem important!
If it takes one woman 9 months to have a baby, it still doesn't take 1 month for 9 women to have a baby. Move along folks... Bad math in the house.
Except that you do. And if "my goofy magic man in the sky is the reason I can't do this" than ANY belief system should be acceptable for saying you can't do something or must do something.I derive my belief system from logic and from myself. My belief that I have a right to privacy and to not be tracked like cattle is at the very least as valid as someone else's belief that they can never be forced to work one day a week because magic man in sky say "no way".
Then show me in your "written basis for perpetuating your belief system so others may follow" where it says, "Thou shall not be tracked like cattle via radio waves". If you can, you might have a leg to stand on.
Now, if you're talking about "I believe that RFID is bad, bacon is good, and time is wibbly-wobbly", you're out of luck. See, you can tell the government to f-off based on "religious" belief, but your personal concepts are not protected. For instance, just because you believe in pacifism, doesn't stop the government from drafting you into the army. And even if you believe in your core that clothes are for sissies and free-ballin' is the way to go, don't expect to walk down the street very far before being tackled and arrested.
If you want religious protection for your ideas, you need to either get the government to recognize your religion, but that's a lot of paperwork, fees, and requirements, -OR- find an existing religion that says you don't have to wear an ID badge, but then you'll probably have to prove your devotion to show that you're not just faking it.
Good luck with that.
P.S. Right to privacy only goes as far as where you would have a reasonable expectation of having privacy. Showing up to a building where they already have my name and date of birth, where I can consuming their supplies, and expecting a document after a few years of proving I absorbed information well enough to earn a certificate of graduation blows that argument out of the water.
Instead of attaching a sample compliance letter, why didn't the AG attach a sample privacy policy and open source it so that developers can use it?
As someone who recently hired a lawyer to go over a Privacy Policy and Terms of Service, I can assure you that what the average person THINKS should be in a Privacy Policy and Terms of Service are vastly different than what is needed to be legal, and most important, enforceable.
A good Privacy Policy should include not just what you store, but how you collect it, and how it is stored. Are you using cookies? Can I opt-out of using cookies? Can anyone else see those cookies? If I delete the app, does that delete my personal data? How can I request it be removed? What steps are you taking to protect my data? What about my financial data? All those in-app purchases, how much of my credit card information do you get? Can you see my personal data? What about employees? Partners? Advertisers?
There is no way to make a "safe" policy that will fit everyone. At best, the AG would put out a document that includes all possible verbiage and it would be up to each user to cut out what isn't needed. But odds are, people are going to screw it up and leave in contradicting clauses, thus nullify the whole thing.
Hire a lawyer. Even if it's just a one-time thing. Just like getting business tax licenses, trademarks, and dev tools, it is the cost of doing business.
In my code I have developed a certain style/guideline about comments 1) Always comment in detail the utility functions. They are the most likely to have obscure code, hacks, tricks, or otherwise confusing to read on first view. 2) Database functions should self document, both by the name of the function and a quick glance at the query. A function named Members_Load_All_By_Time( minutes, array ) kinda says it all. 3) Display functions get commented to break up sections; here is where navigation starts/end, here is where notes get displayed, etc. 4) Long If/Then/ElseIf/Else get one for each condition about why test for that specific condition. 5) If pulling in a feed, or otherwise getting a complex array/structure, have a comment block of what the input looks like. This could be an example of the XML, members to an array, or other non-standard information. Something to show what I'm working with. 6) If using a technique found on a forum or blog, include a comment to the URL/post, date it was published, name of author, and other info to get back to the posting. Not only to CYA in case of licensing issues, but check back occasionally to see if the author or a commenter has made an improvement. Or for me to submit an improvement I discovered.
As a side note, sometimes even better than comments is just good coding style. If the language allows it, use whitespace to your advantage; line things up, indent to show beginning and end of loops, and add blank lines to give visual breaks and convergence points.
Since the government controls the law they can pretty much conclude that the official story is the truth and say that anyone who claims that the official story is false is a liar.
Hmm. Instead I'd say that there's a 50/50 chance of either telling lies. Ergo, imprison them both for half the standard sentence length.
This is the government and media.
I'd say there is a 100% chance that both of them are lying in one way or another.
Places where "nanoparticles", "rectennas", and "electronic ink" just won't work but QR codes are fine: 1) My business card - Scan the code and it can take you to my website or automatically add my information to your contact list. Is Kinko's going to start printing cards with electronic ink?
2) Flyers - I can print out a flyer with a QR code. Hell, gimme some graph paper and a Sharpie and I can build a QR code. I don't think any store-bought inkjet or laser printer will be printing these any time soon.
3) T-shirts - I can advertise my business by either wearing or giving away t-shirts with QR codes silk-screened on them. Will this new rectenna survive even one wash?
4) Billboards - The first word of "NFC" is "Near". How often do you get "near" a billboard? Unless you're tagging it. In which case I am pretty sure you wouldn't care about getting the advertiser's message.
5) Television - I can put a QR code in a television promo (Shazam is doing the same thing, except with audio). I cannot apply electronic ink to your TV so you can easily use your smart device to get more information about my product.
This is purely a "swiping" technology (must be close enough for the radio waves/microwaves reach my phone). I would never have this turned on by default for the same reason I use a hole punch on RFID credit cards; I want control of what I am sending or receiving. So how is this going to help me? I'm either going to manually load up a QR code app, or a rectenna app.
...has to meet four criteria: A good security question should be definitive — there should only be one correct answer; Applicable — the question should be possible to answer for as large a portion of users as possible; Memorable — the user should have little difficulty remembering it; and Safe — it should be difficult to guess or find through research.
Some may consider this a spin off of "Definitive", but I would like to add "Immutable".
Immutable -- The answer should not change over time or situation
The classic example of failures to this criteria this would be "What is your favorite artist/song/color/book/food/child/body part/etc?" Since no site ever lets you go back and adjust your security question, the answer you give is the answer you must stick with. There are dozens of websites that can easily tell I was a child of the 80's. This also means questions involving time-sensitive things cannot ask for the most recent of something; like "What is the last tattoo you got?" or "What did you eat for breakfast today?"
Better variations of these questions would be, "In second grade, who was your best friend?", "What street did your first love/crush live on?", or "What was the make/model/OS of the first computer you owned?" They exist in a fixed point in time, and do not change based on whim.
Except now you're introducing the elements of inertia, mechanics, engineering, etc into the race. Thanks for adding more moving parts and complexity.
Not to mention that there is no way to gently dissipate the inertial force of when that clutch is disengaged. The runner is running full speed in a controlled "hamster wheel". When the clutch releases, there will be an initial jerk as the wheel is no longer free floating but instead contacting the track surface. Imagine running on a tread mill and suddenly the platform stops. You don't just step off gently, you proper forward violently, stumbling, and most likely crashing.
The most bothersome statement to me is right here:
>consumer-grade antivirus products
Look, we all know that more advanced solutions are out there, antivirus techniques that rely on advanced chipset features and even custom hardware modules to protect systems. Yet we're still stuck using the same old known-signature-scanning, high-level-OS-API-using *shit* that wasn't up to the job a decade ago.
Agreed.
One of my biggest issue most AV software nowadays is that they claim to be improving, but still use the same methodologies as always. What they are spending their money, time, and resources on is the f'n UI. In the end, I really don't need or want a pretty UI. Don't nag me about updates, just do it. I don't need a graph showing how many files were scanned per hour/day, just scan.I don't need a separate screen showing how well the mail scanner is working versus the web scanner. Just put a small icon in the system tray to say, "Your AV is running, Keep calm and carry on"
If the software does find something, pop up a simple box saying, here is what was found, where it found it, why it thinks it's bad, and what should it do. Oh, and make sure that the name of virus is copy-able; so that I can paste it into a Google search and see details about what I'm up against.
So, someone can beat you for 8 minutes with a lead pipe, I step in and beat you for 3 then stop. You'd still vote for me?
tempting. Maybe if you told me that it was to prevent terrorism and protect the children.
Okay, so my final offer is to have someone beat you with an iron pipe, I step in and claim hero, then proceed to beat you with a rubber hose. But only in those places that weren't crushed by the iron pipe and at a slower pace. So while you're thankful for allowing the old wounds to heal, I can still beat you in new and less provable ways.
So.. We need a way to design one car that works everywhere and follows the guidelines of the country, state, region while still feels natural.
1) Since the car will be driven in both American and European areas, the steering wheel must work whether you drive on the left or the right side of the road, and automatically know whether to display miles or kilometers. 2) Not every road is the same size, so we need to compensate for when you go down long, narrow roads, or if the road is wide so you can see more, what I call, "land-scape". 3) Cars need to react quickly, so even when we reconfigure the break pedal placement for each country, there can't be a lot of overhead or extra framework in between the driver's action and the car's reaction. 4) Since we have a brand to uphold, the design must be recognizable as ours. By the same token, every area has a certain look and feel to be accepted so it must be designed with that in mind too. 5) Certain states (I'm looking at you California) have emission standards, while other areas could care less. So we should design to the lowest common standard, then charge for Internal Natural After-market Permission Parts, or "In-App", so that no matter where you go, the car can actually work.
Because I don't like reading anything into anything...
He didn't say the "Diablo *3* console project".
This could be a case where there is Diablo 3, for the PC, Diablo: Return to Sanctuary for Xbox360, Diablo 2:Cow Wars for PS3, and Nintendogs: Duriel Edition for the 3DS, and Horadric Cube Simulator for the Wii.
The article is saying Google will start verifying that names are real. Presumably so that when you "circle" Adam Sessler you're getting the nerd you hoped for and not some random dude in Baltimore.
Now, if you used a "sorta" fake name (like I tend to only use part of my last name) they will crack down to make sure it's completely accurate. You must be who you say you are and leave anonymity in the dust.
Unless you're missing steps in your description, you're forgetting the part where the customer is standing outside waiting for the doors to open. So in the time of "Between zero and five minutes after the scheduled opening, it unlocks the doors" they walk in and start shopping.
Five minutes later a buzzer sounds which means nothing to the customer and they continue shopping.
"After ten minutes, the computer could assume human error, and stop trying to unlock the doors." But the doors were already unlocked, so I'm guessing you mean they re-lock, trapping the poor customer inside. Through no fault of their own they are now a trespassing criminal and will need police intervention to open the doors so they can get out.
If you really meant that the doors wouldn't open until someone hits the button, then what's the point of automating the opening of the doors? You're still asking for a human to unlock the door, just via a button instead of a key.
I wonder why religions even have made sex to look like a bad thing.
Historically, sex out of wedlock HAS been a very bad thing. Venereal diseases, unwanted pregnancies, death and sickness (really....the list of famous people who died of venereal disease at a young age is surprisingly long). Of course that's not really a problem anymore, but that's only been true for the last 60 years or so. For the thousands of years before that, religion was right on in their recommendations. Religion moves slowly to deal with new developments, especially on relatively minor issues (seriously....pick up any holy book and count the number of paragraphs talking about sex. It's a small proportion. Usually significantly less than 1%).
There are two main factors to religion's stand on sex (and by religion I mean the more popular choices in America; not every single religion).
First and foremost, to all the religions that have a stigma on sex, the only purpose of sex is to make babies to perpetuate the religion and moreso, perpetuate the coffers. You have a baby, they get a future tither. That's why the bible talks about "spilling seed" as a bad thing; you're wasting their future money.
Second, they only want you to perform in the least satisfactory way. Because if sex is fun, guilt-free, and felt good, you'd do it all the time. If you're going to do it all the time, you're going to take steps to prevent having children (pills, condoms, cut, etc). Since you're only doing it occasionally and it's not that exciting of a position, you'll want to get the most out of it. Plus, as the parent mentioned, too much of a good thing can cause death. Too much death and no one is around to perpetuate the religion.
Slashdot Mirror
Not necessarily. Sometimes social engineering takes advantage of people's assumptions. If you wear a printer servicing uniform and people assume that you're there to fix a printer, are you lying or deceiving them? I'd posit that their assumptions are incorrect and you're not deceiving them unless you're challenged and you start lying.
Bullshit, of course you're deceiving them. You cannot expect normal human beings to question all their assumptions 24/7. Every time you blinked you'd have to prove to yourself that the whole universe hadn't just been switched off and then instantaneously recreated itself.
True story, I once walked into an Apple store wearing a blue shirt.
As luck would have it - it looked pretty damn close to the blue shirts that all the "Geniuses" were wearing that day.
Once inside the store, I was bombarded by a constant stream of people asking me technical questions - which it just so happens that I'm good at answering! ^_^
I didn't deliberately choose to wear a blue shirt that day - it was just the luck of the draw.
Did I deceive anyone in this case??
Social engineering can take on many forms.
Yes, yes you are deceiving people.
Someone comes in and says, "I need help with this." They are assuming that you are an Apple employee, and since you did not correct them, and you KNEW, or at least had a pretty reasonable certainty that they considered you an employee, you are deceiving them.
Now imagine the advice you gave backfired. The customer comes back and says, "Your genius said I should do this, and now my device is bricked. I demand a new one!" After someone back and forth they discover that you were not an employee, but your attire and your attitude convinced them you were. And since the customer did something that bricked the device, and it was not under the advice of a true Apple employee, the warranty is void. Or at the very least, Apple is off the hook and can choose whether or not to fix the problem.
It would have been simple to say, "Yes, I can try helping you with the problem. But just for the record, I am not an Apple Genius," for the sake of clarity and remove any possibility of deception.
There is no big grand conspiracy of evil marketing people versus the grand world of computer people.
1G = 10^9 in every area.
1Gbit/s = 1e9 bits per second (noone complains)
1GHz = 1e9 cycles per second (noone complains)
1GT/s = 1e9 transfers per second (noone complaines)
1GB = 1e9 bytes (oh the horror! the evil marketing oh woe woe woe)
The difference is simple; everything else the consumer takes on faith, but the hard drive is something quantifiable. No one is going to use an oscilloscope to double check the speed of the CPU. Nor can can they exactly check the throughput to be exactly 1GB as the numbers flux enough to cover the difference. Even memory is always abstracted enough that people can never be sure what the exact count is.
But any one can check the properties of a hard drive and see that what was labeled as 1GB is really 1GiB. As noted in someone else's post, once you start reaching Gigas, Teras, and Petas, the percent difference between the two scales is quite noticeable.
That's why woe--I can "see" the difference in this format.
timothy should get fired
You can't fire him. He's a 5-line perl script. All you can do is file bug reports.
Since the article is all about counting and picking nits.. Do you mean 5 lines as in 5 statements/commands, or 5 lines as in a script with 5 carriage returns/line feeds? Or should this be tomorrows article?
What the article calls math, I refer to as "Zerg Rush"
"Hack" #1: So that I'm not tethered to a wall outlet, or go off the grid, I stay up late so I can manually swap out batteries and wear out the plastic clips that holds them in. Assuming I own a phone that has changeable batteries.
Better solution #1: Buy a universal external battery charger which is usually a small box that can easily fit in your pocket with a 9-volt battery and a charging cable.
"Hack" #2: Empty an entire bookcase of books, buy a bulky and expensive holding bracket, and jury-rig the whole thing together just so I can watch a movie that I may or may not even enjoy. But at least I put some of those books to good use as a counter-balance. Although I hope I don't sit up quickly in bed and headbutt my expensive tablet.
Better solution #2a: Read one of the books on my bookcase. When tired, or when I have stopped enjoying it, put it down. Plus now I can get out of bed much easier.
Better solution #2b: If I really need to watch movies at night, but a $20 goose-neck lamp and use some bent coat hangers to suspend the tablet. Or if I don't like the movie, take the coat hanger bracket off, and use the lamp to be a bedside lamp so I can read a book. See #2a.
"Hack" #3: Buy milk crates (hey another place I can put all those books I displaced and don't read), and attach failed device from "Hack" #2.
Better solution #3a: Use a portable music player and listen to music or listen to an audio book.
Better solution #3b: Using a bungee cord and a decorative plate holder, and place the tablet over the console. You don't really need to watch the clock.
Better solution #3c: Buy a sheet music holder (under $40 for even an expensive one) and place it just in from of the elliptical. It collapses down much more compact than 4-5 milk crates.
Depending on what is being deleted, I flip-flop back and forth between commenting out chunks for a revision or two and then deleting, and just deleting. For small sections, I tend to just straight delete. In rare circumstances I'll delete but replace the code with a comment like "Used to do X here, but now it's covered by Y" but only until Y becomes the standard and then those tend to drop off.
For larger sections or whole functions I tend to comment out first until I'm sure the new code is working then deleting it. There are a few reasons behind this:
1) There is an advantage to having the old code instantly available (no diffs, no downloading to a separate directory, etc) to make sure that all the functionality that was previous there is still in the new code. It's very nice to go back and look when the new code isn't working right to flow through the old code and see what's missing. "Oh, we used to set this flag, but when I optimized I did away with it. Apparently, someone is using it much later in the code. Guess I need to put it back." *
2) There is a standard of, when creating new database functions (a new table), that there be a set of default functions; Create the table, Load Defaults (if applicable), Insert a record, Update a record, Load a record, and Delete a record. But as time goes by developers may create more specialized versions of these functions (JOINing other key tables, for example). More updates and soon no one is using the regular functions as the specialized ones work for what they need and then some. So if I see a function not being used any more I comment it out saying, "Deprecated; try using FunctionName() instead." If nothing breaks immediately, and no one complains for a few revisions, the extra functions go away.
* The better, but not real-world, solution would be contact whoever maintains the code that used the flag and see if we can they can update/optimize the code to work without the flag.
But how long is that in parsecs?
Seriously. If it takes me 10 minutes to read and understand it, then it take me 10 minutes to read and understand it. The fact that millions of other people are doing the same thing holds no value other than Adobe is wasting our time.
To watch (and understand?) an episode of Seinfeld takes 22 minutes. There were 180 episodes. With a made up average of 50 million people watched those episodes. That means that I'm creating a really big number but with no actual value other than all of humanity wasted a lot of time watching "nothing" and as I type this you should be reading it in a louder and louder, more excited voice until I finally end the sentence where I'm practically yelling in an effort to make this seem important!
If it takes one woman 9 months to have a baby, it still doesn't take 1 month for 9 women to have a baby. Move along folks... Bad math in the house.
Except that you do. And if "my goofy magic man in the sky is the reason I can't do this" than ANY belief system should be acceptable for saying you can't do something or must do something.I derive my belief system from logic and from myself. My belief that I have a right to privacy and to not be tracked like cattle is at the very least as valid as someone else's belief that they can never be forced to work one day a week because magic man in sky say "no way".
Then show me in your "written basis for perpetuating your belief system so others may follow" where it says, "Thou shall not be tracked like cattle via radio waves". If you can, you might have a leg to stand on.
Now, if you're talking about "I believe that RFID is bad, bacon is good, and time is wibbly-wobbly", you're out of luck. See, you can tell the government to f-off based on "religious" belief, but your personal concepts are not protected. For instance, just because you believe in pacifism, doesn't stop the government from drafting you into the army. And even if you believe in your core that clothes are for sissies and free-ballin' is the way to go, don't expect to walk down the street very far before being tackled and arrested.
If you want religious protection for your ideas, you need to either get the government to recognize your religion, but that's a lot of paperwork, fees, and requirements, -OR- find an existing religion that says you don't have to wear an ID badge, but then you'll probably have to prove your devotion to show that you're not just faking it.
Good luck with that.
P.S. Right to privacy only goes as far as where you would have a reasonable expectation of having privacy. Showing up to a building where they already have my name and date of birth, where I can consuming their supplies, and expecting a document after a few years of proving I absorbed information well enough to earn a certificate of graduation blows that argument out of the water.
Zinda, his face black, his eyes red. Kadir beneath Mo Moteh.
Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra. Sokath, his eyes opened.
But then how could they make a profit on the interest of all the money they skimmed.. I mean, accidentally overcharged?
Instead of attaching a sample compliance letter, why didn't the AG attach a sample privacy policy and open source it so that developers can use it?
As someone who recently hired a lawyer to go over a Privacy Policy and Terms of Service, I can assure you that what the average person THINKS should be in a Privacy Policy and Terms of Service are vastly different than what is needed to be legal, and most important, enforceable.
A good Privacy Policy should include not just what you store, but how you collect it, and how it is stored. Are you using cookies? Can I opt-out of using cookies? Can anyone else see those cookies? If I delete the app, does that delete my personal data? How can I request it be removed? What steps are you taking to protect my data? What about my financial data? All those in-app purchases, how much of my credit card information do you get? Can you see my personal data? What about employees? Partners? Advertisers?
There is no way to make a "safe" policy that will fit everyone. At best, the AG would put out a document that includes all possible verbiage and it would be up to each user to cut out what isn't needed. But odds are, people are going to screw it up and leave in contradicting clauses, thus nullify the whole thing.
Hire a lawyer. Even if it's just a one-time thing. Just like getting business tax licenses, trademarks, and dev tools, it is the cost of doing business.
In my code I have developed a certain style/guideline about comments
1) Always comment in detail the utility functions. They are the most likely to have obscure code, hacks, tricks, or otherwise confusing to read on first view.
2) Database functions should self document, both by the name of the function and a quick glance at the query. A function named Members_Load_All_By_Time( minutes, array ) kinda says it all.
3) Display functions get commented to break up sections; here is where navigation starts/end, here is where notes get displayed, etc.
4) Long If/Then/ElseIf/Else get one for each condition about why test for that specific condition.
5) If pulling in a feed, or otherwise getting a complex array/structure, have a comment block of what the input looks like. This could be an example of the XML, members to an array, or other non-standard information. Something to show what I'm working with.
6) If using a technique found on a forum or blog, include a comment to the URL/post, date it was published, name of author, and other info to get back to the posting. Not only to CYA in case of licensing issues, but check back occasionally to see if the author or a commenter has made an improvement. Or for me to submit an improvement I discovered.
As a side note, sometimes even better than comments is just good coding style. If the language allows it, use whitespace to your advantage; line things up, indent to show beginning and end of loops, and add blank lines to give visual breaks and convergence points.
Since the government controls the law they can pretty much conclude that the official story is the truth and say that anyone who claims that the official story is false is a liar.
Hmm. Instead I'd say that there's a 50/50 chance of either telling lies. Ergo, imprison them both for half the standard sentence length.
This is the government and media.
I'd say there is a 100% chance that both of them are lying in one way or another.
Places where "nanoparticles", "rectennas", and "electronic ink" just won't work but QR codes are fine:
1) My business card - Scan the code and it can take you to my website or automatically add my information to your contact list. Is Kinko's going to start printing cards with electronic ink?
2) Flyers - I can print out a flyer with a QR code. Hell, gimme some graph paper and a Sharpie and I can build a QR code. I don't think any store-bought inkjet or laser printer will be printing these any time soon.
3) T-shirts - I can advertise my business by either wearing or giving away t-shirts with QR codes silk-screened on them. Will this new rectenna survive even one wash?
4) Billboards - The first word of "NFC" is "Near". How often do you get "near" a billboard? Unless you're tagging it. In which case I am pretty sure you wouldn't care about getting the advertiser's message.
5) Television - I can put a QR code in a television promo (Shazam is doing the same thing, except with audio). I cannot apply electronic ink to your TV so you can easily use your smart device to get more information about my product.
This is purely a "swiping" technology (must be close enough for the radio waves/microwaves reach my phone). I would never have this turned on by default for the same reason I use a hole punch on RFID credit cards; I want control of what I am sending or receiving. So how is this going to help me? I'm either going to manually load up a QR code app, or a rectenna app.
...has to meet four criteria: A good security question should be definitive — there should only be one correct answer; Applicable — the question should be possible to answer for as large a portion of users as possible; Memorable — the user should have little difficulty remembering it; and Safe — it should be difficult to guess or find through research.
Some may consider this a spin off of "Definitive", but I would like to add "Immutable".
Immutable -- The answer should not change over time or situation
The classic example of failures to this criteria this would be "What is your favorite artist/song/color/book/food/child/body part/etc?" Since no site ever lets you go back and adjust your security question, the answer you give is the answer you must stick with. There are dozens of websites that can easily tell I was a child of the 80's. This also means questions involving time-sensitive things cannot ask for the most recent of something; like "What is the last tattoo you got?" or "What did you eat for breakfast today?"
Better variations of these questions would be, "In second grade, who was your best friend?", "What street did your first love/crush live on?", or "What was the make/model/OS of the first computer you owned?" They exist in a fixed point in time, and do not change based on whim.
Except now you're introducing the elements of inertia, mechanics, engineering, etc into the race. Thanks for adding more moving parts and complexity.
Not to mention that there is no way to gently dissipate the inertial force of when that clutch is disengaged. The runner is running full speed in a controlled "hamster wheel". When the clutch releases, there will be an initial jerk as the wheel is no longer free floating but instead contacting the track surface. Imagine running on a tread mill and suddenly the platform stops. You don't just step off gently, you proper forward violently, stumbling, and most likely crashing.
The most bothersome statement to me is right here:
>consumer-grade antivirus products
Look, we all know that more advanced solutions are out there, antivirus techniques that rely on advanced chipset features and even custom hardware modules to protect systems. Yet we're still stuck using the same old known-signature-scanning, high-level-OS-API-using *shit* that wasn't up to the job a decade ago.
Agreed.
One of my biggest issue most AV software nowadays is that they claim to be improving, but still use the same methodologies as always. What they are spending their money, time, and resources on is the f'n UI. In the end, I really don't need or want a pretty UI. Don't nag me about updates, just do it. I don't need a graph showing how many files were scanned per hour/day, just scan.I don't need a separate screen showing how well the mail scanner is working versus the web scanner. Just put a small icon in the system tray to say, "Your AV is running, Keep calm and carry on"
If the software does find something, pop up a simple box saying, here is what was found, where it found it, why it thinks it's bad, and what should it do. Oh, and make sure that the name of virus is copy-able; so that I can paste it into a Google search and see details about what I'm up against.
So, someone can beat you for 8 minutes with a lead pipe, I step in and beat you for 3 then stop. You'd still vote for me?
tempting. Maybe if you told me that it was to prevent terrorism and protect the children.
Okay, so my final offer is to have someone beat you with an iron pipe, I step in and claim hero, then proceed to beat you with a rubber hose. But only in those places that weren't crushed by the iron pipe and at a slower pace. So while you're thankful for allowing the old wounds to heal, I can still beat you in new and less provable ways.
So.. We need a way to design one car that works everywhere and follows the guidelines of the country, state, region while still feels natural.
1) Since the car will be driven in both American and European areas, the steering wheel must work whether you drive on the left or the right side of the road, and automatically know whether to display miles or kilometers.
2) Not every road is the same size, so we need to compensate for when you go down long, narrow roads, or if the road is wide so you can see more, what I call, "land-scape".
3) Cars need to react quickly, so even when we reconfigure the break pedal placement for each country, there can't be a lot of overhead or extra framework in between the driver's action and the car's reaction.
4) Since we have a brand to uphold, the design must be recognizable as ours. By the same token, every area has a certain look and feel to be accepted so it must be designed with that in mind too.
5) Certain states (I'm looking at you California) have emission standards, while other areas could care less. So we should design to the lowest common standard, then charge for Internal Natural After-market Permission Parts, or "In-App", so that no matter where you go, the car can actually work.
Simple, right?
Because I don't like reading anything into anything...
He didn't say the "Diablo *3* console project".
This could be a case where there is Diablo 3, for the PC, Diablo: Return to Sanctuary for Xbox360, Diablo 2:Cow Wars for PS3, and Nintendogs: Duriel Edition for the 3DS, and Horadric Cube Simulator for the Wii.
Time for some schooling from the Animaniacs.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NC1qkLn6IRI
Where did it say it would allow fake names?
The article is saying Google will start verifying that names are real. Presumably so that when you "circle" Adam Sessler you're getting the nerd you hoped for and not some random dude in Baltimore.
Now, if you used a "sorta" fake name (like I tend to only use part of my last name) they will crack down to make sure it's completely accurate. You must be who you say you are and leave anonymity in the dust.
Unless you're missing steps in your description, you're forgetting the part where the customer is standing outside waiting for the doors to open. So in the time of "Between zero and five minutes after the scheduled opening, it unlocks the doors" they walk in and start shopping.
Five minutes later a buzzer sounds which means nothing to the customer and they continue shopping.
"After ten minutes, the computer could assume human error, and stop trying to unlock the doors." But the doors were already unlocked, so I'm guessing you mean they re-lock, trapping the poor customer inside. Through no fault of their own they are now a trespassing criminal and will need police intervention to open the doors so they can get out.
If you really meant that the doors wouldn't open until someone hits the button, then what's the point of automating the opening of the doors? You're still asking for a human to unlock the door, just via a button instead of a key.
Hmmm. I still have my 3dfx Monster 3D cards and an Aureal Vortex sound card for true A3D sound so I am all set there.
Of course that means I'll need to pull out the 33.6 modem to make room, so.. you know.. no online play.
I wonder why religions even have made sex to look like a bad thing.
Historically, sex out of wedlock HAS been a very bad thing. Venereal diseases, unwanted pregnancies, death and sickness (really....the list of famous people who died of venereal disease at a young age is surprisingly long). Of course that's not really a problem anymore, but that's only been true for the last 60 years or so. For the thousands of years before that, religion was right on in their recommendations. Religion moves slowly to deal with new developments, especially on relatively minor issues (seriously....pick up any holy book and count the number of paragraphs talking about sex. It's a small proportion. Usually significantly less than 1%).
There are two main factors to religion's stand on sex (and by religion I mean the more popular choices in America; not every single religion).
First and foremost, to all the religions that have a stigma on sex, the only purpose of sex is to make babies to perpetuate the religion and moreso, perpetuate the coffers. You have a baby, they get a future tither. That's why the bible talks about "spilling seed" as a bad thing; you're wasting their future money.
Second, they only want you to perform in the least satisfactory way. Because if sex is fun, guilt-free, and felt good, you'd do it all the time. If you're going to do it all the time, you're going to take steps to prevent having children (pills, condoms, cut, etc). Since you're only doing it occasionally and it's not that exciting of a position, you'll want to get the most out of it. Plus, as the parent mentioned, too much of a good thing can cause death. Too much death and no one is around to perpetuate the religion.