The thing is the middle classes interests do align with the rich. The problem is the middle class is much much much smaller than most people think, and whole lot of people who call themselves middle class are truly poor.
Historically the middle class were skilled tradesmen or merchants with the capital they needed to perform their craft. Though they would usually have been landless. The big thing is they were free to move both legally and economically speaking.
So here is the thing if you have mortgage and car loan you are paying and you can't afford to leave you job, for 6 months to a year or longer, you are not a member of the middle class.
That's the problem it seemed simple. 10 years of seriously trying put us on the moon. 60 years later we're still fighting the war on poverty. Oh no bother looking all is Marxist societies, they all collapsed. Poverty is probably the most complex and difficult problem we face. Solving it is often a conflict with other things we value highly.
do you really think we can't, ever, utilize the vast resources out side this planet?
Given the vast distances and hostility of space and the fact that we have to use this planets resources to reach them in the first place, despite how much Star Trek I have watch, yes I thin that is a good possibility.
The problem is not that jobs need it or not but HR and hiring manager use the fact that you have a degree to as an indicator of a few things:
1) You are able to stick with a project for a long period of time and see it through 2) You are able to accept and complete tasks that seem and probably are arbitrary and pointless because someone says do it. 3) You can take a set of instructions and fill in the blanks on your own and run with it, with something less than constant supervision.
There really is no better indicator of the above available. You might be able to accurately assess that stuff in an interview and you might not. A bad hire can be a costly mistake for a business. There are enough candidates for any given job with a degree right now, there exists no good reasons to gamble on someone without one.
In the current job market I would NEVER consider a candidate without a degree for anything a position above "cleaner" because there is no reason to take the chance, what you have a degree in is less of a concern though. You want to interview for an IT operations job and your degree is in "20th Century Art History" that is not necessarily a problem.
I think the big problem is that 24 x 7 monitoring tends to be outsourced. It's not a good model. SIEM systems or good if anything to deserve human attention. But they either get so over tuned they don't really detect much of anything or they throw a lot of false positives.
Long as your in-house cert team is watching the SIEM that works they know the network. They recognize that radius server is likely to produce a lot of multiple authentication failed followed by authentication succeeded events against the domain controller because of the nature what it does. that's one to ignore but if it happened with some other server it might be a serious issue.
Now that monitoring gets outsourced to some CallCenter. They don't know the network. they escalate tickets for both events. Employees responsible those tickets are no longer 24 hour but they come in all day every day and all night. Most of them are crap how long until those guys stop jumping up from the dinner table to go check their PCs every time the phone vibrates?
Serious incidents get missed or not acted on until the next morning
The security team should have a license to kill from the executive team. We do, our instructions are if we believe we breach is in progress, "shut it down".
Mind you we have never done it. We came very very close to doing so once on a false positive. The operations team failed inform us of some activity they were going to be doing. Fortunately the guy answered his phone, but otherwise we would have pulled the plug and islanded the entire dmz ecommerce and the corporate home page and all.
After reviewing the after action report the executive team agreed and would've been right to do it given what we knew.
That and this disclosure does not immediately an exploit make. There are many steps between knowing the PRNG is weak, and being able use that in working exploit.
I don't know. These things were basically hunted to extinction. So they may be pretty delicious or it might just be that a Mammoth hunt was a comparatively easy way to get the whole tribe fed all at once, with left overs to store.
^^ This what all the "see you do need regulations, I told you so" crowd does not get.
A cheat is a cheat is a cheat and they will cheat you using unregulated BitCoins, just the same way they will cheat you using regulated dollars.
It isn't as if regulations create some magical inviolate barrier. Madoff ran a ponsi scheme masquerading as a hedge fund with SEC reporting requirements and everything. Much of the monies were never recovered. The subprime crisis is another example the brokers just faked all the paperwork and wrote the liar loans.
The only differences in the end is possibly if someone goes to jail or not. FRAUD however is still a crime even if there are no specific securities statues that apply to BitCoin. So these guys certainly could be charged as criminals too. This has NOTHING to do with regulations.
The Russians had a solution for that: Doomsday device. Forget launch capabilities et al, just build one bomb deep underground and well protected but so big it will kill the entire planet.
Right I just don't get this, does not matter if we are talking tablets, media pcs, or phones. All of these machines are big powerful enough now that the possibilities are essentially unlimited. Yet rather than embracing the best of the 90's PC era opening up and trying stuff out; its a rush back the narrow vision that was the Macintosh in 83.
No he was very much running a regulated business. Was he violating regulations, yes, but there is the point it isn't as if something being against the rules creates some magic inviolate barrier to doing it.
Yes the SEC shut him down, just like the bankruptcy court is going to be shutting down Mt.Gox. In both cases after much of the money is long gone.
A cheat is a cheat, using Dollars or Bitcoins. Getting conned sucks for the victim and a slightly longer list of criminal complaints against the conman, beyond say simple Fraud, does not make it suck less.
Worker gets laid off, loses employer-provided health plan. Worker can't find full-time employement; becomes consultant to pay bills; buys health insurance. Conclusion: buying health insurance motivates worker to become consultant!
Except he does not buy health insurance. Why because unlike the good old days when you could your Insurance agent and by an individual catastrophic plan any time you wanted now their an enrollment period to keep people from just signing up after something goes wrong. (Sure if something did go wrong before and you tried to buy a plan you'd be denied for per-exhisting condition) but for anyone without a 'condition' you had no need to do COBRA, you just got a cheap catastophic plan before the end of the month.
So now this employee is destine to pay COBRA for the rest of the year, or if they choose not to do so be slapped with the tax penalty. Those rates are not going be subsidized and are likely absurdly expensive. So really there is one situation where even this bassackwards Obamacare apologist thinking in the above quote works out well for someone.
Worker gets laid off on after October 1st, loses employer-provided health plan. Worker can't find full-time employement; becomes consultant to pay bills; buys health insurance sometime in January. Conclusion: buying health insurance motivates worker to become consultant!
The defenders of this law are guilty of more spin than the Iraqi Information Minister some years back.
The problem with your reasoning is that it presumes that money is given in exchange for work of equal value, but of course the very basis of business is that you pay less than what the work is worth, and the difference is your profit. So this notion of a 1:1 connection between money and value is simply mistaken, and not only that, it's impossible in a capitalist society.
No you don't understand capitalism.
In a free market people don't exchange something of lessor value for something of greater value or vice versa, one of the parties would never agree. What happens is we meet and discover we value things differently.
If I hire you do a job, I do so because I value the "work" less than my money. That might be for any number of reasons: maybe I don't have time to do it myself despite the need; maybe I have a lot of money I don't need for anything else; maybe I don't know how to do the work and so If I chose to invest time instead of dollars the costs would be much greater; etc.
You on the other hand have offered to do the work because you have time, and want something else more and believe that you could satisfy that if you had more money. You value your time and labor less than my dollars.
No it will try them in the order listed until it gets a 'response'; I think if it gets a response like SRVFAIL it will also continue trying the remaining servers, but if gets a incorrect NXDOMAIN it will trust that value and not try the remaining servers.
No we are not being unfair to Feinstein. Secrect committees and secret courts monitoring secret agencies about what secret data they are collecting in their secret facilities; isn't a workable model on the scale we are trying to do it.
Sure state craft requires some secrets and shadows, but democracy in the form a functioning republic needs a lot a sunshine. We have been trying to get people like her to understand we have gone way way way to far with this crap. We have created a monster "We the people" can't control, they 1% who can get elected Senator can't control either. What we have is something that is almost completely beyond control at this point. That monster is crushing our most basic principles under boots year by year, month by month, day by day, moment to moment; destroying the very society it was breed to protect.
Its high time to we take the NSA out behind the tool shed and put it down. The CIA and FBI need a sound kicking; right sizing and reminding of their core missions.
1) Load drugs on drone 2) Drone flies to destination 3) Recipient unloads drugs 4a) Recipient considers attaching agreed upon bundle of cash for a moment 4b) Recipient decides instead to curb stomp drone 5) ???Profit???
The "terrorists" we all have to be so afraid of think setting off some small firecrackers in the car with a propane cylinder is going to destroy Time Square.
The fact is only really deranged individuals want to be mass murderers. Most of time such a serious mental condition does not correlate with the mental facilities needed to acquire the education (sit attentively thru HS Chemistry) and create an effective plot.
Once in a while you get a Collide Shake Mohammad (sp?) but most of the time you get a propane cylinder and hand full blackcats.
I generally come down on the side of disclosure because when it comes to keeping secrets humans are not very good.
First some engineer has a few beers with his cousin, and starts a story out "the boss said don't tell anyone but..." and lets it slip it would possible to enable the thermal cleaning operation of some pressure probe on a gas line without first shutting off the gas, and things could get exciting and you could totally do this without authentication if could just get a connection to signaling bus. Then the cousin repeats this story somewhere for whatever reason and pretty soon the wrong guys hear about it. So just trying to keep it under wraps does not work.
The trick is making sure enough of the right kind of people know about it so the issue gets attention and fixed.
That would be my guess or perhaps just enable the theft in the first place by creating a culture where nobody will ask any questions being aware the documentation and logs won't exist to provide answers.
If someone in authority was making a routine habit of bypassing organizational policies, or thwarting security control some pesky honest person might start to scrutinize their behavior and might even blow a whistle. On the other hand if there are no policies and no security control than nothing anyone does malicious or others is going to seem strange enough to stick ones neck out over.
Slashdot Mirror
The thing is the middle classes interests do align with the rich. The problem is the middle class is much much much smaller than most people think, and whole lot of people who call themselves middle class are truly poor.
Historically the middle class were skilled tradesmen or merchants with the capital they needed to perform their craft. Though they would usually have been landless. The big thing is they were free to move both legally and economically speaking.
So here is the thing if you have mortgage and car loan you are paying and you can't afford to leave you job, for 6 months to a year or longer, you are not a member of the middle class.
That's the problem it seemed simple. 10 years of seriously trying put us on the moon. 60 years later we're still fighting the war on poverty. Oh no bother looking all is Marxist societies, they all collapsed. Poverty is probably the most complex and difficult problem we face. Solving it is often a conflict with other things we value highly.
do you really think we can't, ever, utilize the vast resources out side this planet?
Given the vast distances and hostility of space and the fact that we have to use this planets resources to reach them in the first place, despite how much Star Trek I have watch, yes I thin that is a good possibility.
The problem is not that jobs need it or not but HR and hiring manager use the fact that you have a degree to as an indicator of a few things:
1) You are able to stick with a project for a long period of time and see it through
2) You are able to accept and complete tasks that seem and probably are arbitrary and pointless because someone says do it.
3) You can take a set of instructions and fill in the blanks on your own and run with it, with something less than constant supervision.
There really is no better indicator of the above available. You might be able to accurately assess that stuff in an interview and you might not. A bad hire can be a costly mistake for a business. There are enough candidates for any given job with a degree right now, there exists no good reasons to gamble on someone without one.
In the current job market I would NEVER consider a candidate without a degree for anything a position above "cleaner" because there is no reason to take the chance, what you have a degree in is less of a concern though. You want to interview for an IT operations job and your degree is in "20th Century Art History" that is not necessarily a problem.
I think the big problem is that 24 x 7 monitoring tends to be outsourced. It's not a good model. SIEM systems or good if anything to deserve human attention. But they either get so over tuned they don't really detect much of anything or they throw a lot of false positives.
Long as your in-house cert team is watching the SIEM that works they know the network. They recognize that radius server is likely to produce a lot of multiple authentication failed followed by authentication succeeded events against the domain controller because of the nature what it does. that's one to ignore but if it happened with some other server it might be a serious issue.
Now that monitoring gets outsourced to some CallCenter. They don't know the network. they escalate tickets for both events. Employees responsible those tickets are no longer 24 hour but they come in all day every day and all night. Most of them are crap how long until those guys stop jumping up from the dinner table to go check their PCs every time the phone vibrates?
Serious incidents get missed or not acted on until the next morning
The security team should have a license to kill from the executive team. We do, our instructions are if we believe we breach is in progress, "shut it down".
Mind you we have never done it. We came very very close to doing so once on a false positive. The operations team failed inform us of some activity they were going to be doing. Fortunately the guy answered his phone, but otherwise we would have pulled the plug and islanded the entire dmz ecommerce and the corporate home page and all.
After reviewing the after action report the executive team agreed and would've been right to do it given what we knew.
That is how it should work
That and this disclosure does not immediately an exploit make. There are many steps between knowing the PRNG is weak, and being able use that in working exploit.
shh don't talk about the hairy elephant in the room
I don't know. These things were basically hunted to extinction. So they may be pretty delicious or it might just be that a Mammoth hunt was a comparatively easy way to get the whole tribe fed all at once, with left overs to store.
^^ This what all the "see you do need regulations, I told you so" crowd does not get.
A cheat is a cheat is a cheat and they will cheat you using unregulated BitCoins, just the same way they will cheat you using regulated dollars.
It isn't as if regulations create some magical inviolate barrier. Madoff ran a ponsi scheme masquerading as a hedge fund with SEC reporting requirements and everything. Much of the monies were never recovered. The subprime crisis is another example the brokers just faked all the paperwork and wrote the liar loans.
The only differences in the end is possibly if someone goes to jail or not. FRAUD however is still a crime even if there are no specific securities statues that apply to BitCoin. So these guys certainly could be charged as criminals too. This has NOTHING to do with regulations.
The Russians had a solution for that: Doomsday device. Forget launch capabilities et al, just build one bomb deep underground and well protected but so big it will kill the entire planet.
Right I just don't get this, does not matter if we are talking tablets, media pcs, or phones. All of these machines are big powerful enough now that the possibilities are essentially unlimited. Yet rather than embracing the best of the 90's PC era opening up and trying stuff out; its a rush back the narrow vision that was the Macintosh in 83.
No he was very much running a regulated business. Was he violating regulations, yes, but there is the point it isn't as if something being against the rules creates some magic inviolate barrier to doing it.
Yes the SEC shut him down, just like the bankruptcy court is going to be shutting down Mt.Gox. In both cases after much of the money is long gone.
A cheat is a cheat, using Dollars or Bitcoins. Getting conned sucks for the victim and a slightly longer list of criminal complaints against the conman, beyond say simple Fraud, does not make it suck less.
Worker gets laid off, loses employer-provided health plan. Worker can't find full-time employement; becomes consultant to pay bills; buys health insurance. Conclusion: buying health insurance motivates worker to become consultant!
Except he does not buy health insurance. Why because unlike the good old days when you could your Insurance agent and by an individual catastrophic plan any time you wanted now their an enrollment period to keep people from just signing up after something goes wrong. (Sure if something did go wrong before and you tried to buy a plan you'd be denied for per-exhisting condition) but for anyone without a 'condition' you had no need to do COBRA, you just got a cheap catastophic plan before the end of the month.
So now this employee is destine to pay COBRA for the rest of the year, or if they choose not to do so be slapped with the tax penalty. Those rates are not going be subsidized and are likely absurdly expensive. So really there is one situation where even this bassackwards Obamacare apologist thinking in the above quote works out well for someone.
Worker gets laid off on after October 1st, loses employer-provided health plan. Worker can't find full-time employement; becomes consultant to pay bills; buys health insurance sometime in January. Conclusion: buying health insurance motivates worker to become consultant!
The defenders of this law are guilty of more spin than the Iraqi Information Minister some years back.
Give it a rest, you lost your money and nobody can prove where it went. Oh the joys of an unregulated currency.
Give it a rest, you gave your money to Madoff. He lost it and nobody can prove where it went. Oh the joys of a regulated currency.
Good news though you also got to caught up a bunch of money in Taxation to support the SEC that didn't save you...
The problem with your reasoning is that it presumes that money is given in exchange for work of equal value, but of course the very basis of business is that you pay less than what the work is worth, and the difference is your profit. So this notion of a 1:1 connection between money and value is simply mistaken, and not only that, it's impossible in a capitalist society.
No you don't understand capitalism.
In a free market people don't exchange something of lessor value for something of greater value or vice versa, one of the parties would never agree. What happens is we meet and discover we value things differently.
If I hire you do a job, I do so because I value the "work" less than my money. That might be for any number of reasons: maybe I don't have time to do it myself despite the need; maybe I have a lot of money I don't need for anything else; maybe I don't know how to do the work and so If I chose to invest time instead of dollars the costs would be much greater; etc.
You on the other hand have offered to do the work because you have time, and want something else more and believe that you could satisfy that if you had more money. You value your time and labor less than my dollars.
nslookup
>server 8.8.8.8
>hostname
>exit
You can 8.8.8.8 is google but you could just any valid dns server.
No it will try them in the order listed until it gets a 'response'; I think if it gets a response like SRVFAIL it will also continue trying the remaining servers, but if gets a incorrect NXDOMAIN it will trust that value and not try the remaining servers.
No we are not being unfair to Feinstein. Secrect committees and secret courts monitoring secret agencies about what secret data they are collecting in their secret facilities; isn't a workable model on the scale we are trying to do it.
Sure state craft requires some secrets and shadows, but democracy in the form a functioning republic needs a lot a sunshine. We have been trying to get people like her to understand we have gone way way way to far with this crap. We have created a monster "We the people" can't control, they 1% who can get elected Senator can't control either. What we have is something that is almost completely beyond control at this point. That monster is crushing our most basic principles under boots year by year, month by month, day by day, moment to moment; destroying the very society it was breed to protect.
Its high time to we take the NSA out behind the tool shed and put it down. The CIA and FBI need a sound kicking; right sizing and reminding of their core missions.
We are all equal but some of us are little more equal.
Not only that its the same Senator who argued how necessary to national security the NSA surveillance programs are after the Snowden leaks.
Hypocrisy at its finest; curb stop my constituents 4th amendment rights and thats all fine, but violate my rights and look out!
I'd like to think she might learn something from this, but I doubt she will.
The problem is getting paid.
1) Load drugs on drone
2) Drone flies to destination
3) Recipient unloads drugs
4a) Recipient considers attaching agreed upon bundle of cash for a moment
4b) Recipient decides instead to curb stomp drone
5) ???Profit???
Right,
The "terrorists" we all have to be so afraid of think setting off some small firecrackers in the car with a propane cylinder is going to destroy Time Square.
The fact is only really deranged individuals want to be mass murderers. Most of time such a serious mental condition does not correlate with the mental facilities needed to acquire the education (sit attentively thru HS Chemistry) and create an effective plot.
Once in a while you get a Collide Shake Mohammad (sp?) but most of the time you get a propane cylinder and hand full blackcats.
The corollary however is "loose lips sink ships".
I generally come down on the side of disclosure because when it comes to keeping secrets humans are not very good.
First some engineer has a few beers with his cousin, and starts a story out "the boss said don't tell anyone but..." and lets it slip it would possible to enable the thermal cleaning operation of some pressure probe on a gas line without first shutting off the gas, and things could get exciting and you could totally do this without authentication if could just get a connection to signaling bus. Then the cousin repeats this story somewhere for whatever reason and pretty soon the wrong guys hear about it. So just trying to keep it under wraps does not work.
The trick is making sure enough of the right kind of people know about it so the issue gets attention and fixed.
That would be my guess or perhaps just enable the theft in the first place by creating a culture where nobody will ask any questions being aware the documentation and logs won't exist to provide answers.
If someone in authority was making a routine habit of bypassing organizational policies, or thwarting security control some pesky honest person might start to scrutinize their behavior and might even blow a whistle. On the other hand if there are no policies and no security control than nothing anyone does malicious or others is going to seem strange enough to stick ones neck out over.