I am not a medical doctor or any kind of doctor for that matter, but my understanding is many antibiotics are readily passed into urine even in patients with mostly normal kidney and liver function.
Alternatively you could look at it as vertical integration. The premium cable group is really the only segment trying to 'bypass the middle man' the Studio's etc are doing just about anything they can to protect their old distribution model:
1) Sell it to the theaters (period of exclusivity) 2) Sell it to the second run theaters (shorter period of exclusivity) 3) Home video release 4) Streaming (new and constantly tinkered with)
Netflix and Amazon have both discovered the existing content industry merely tolerates them, if anything as way to scape a little more revenue in from folks who otherwise would have just gone the piratebay.{whatever it is this week}. They are not really interesting in offering licensing terms that given the streaming guys much of a "piece of the action" on any valuable properties. So rather than wait around for Studios to 'cut out the middle man' Netflix and Amazon are getting into the content business, makes sense.
The next logical step is for Amazon (who has more capital than Netflix) to go after the other distribution channels, why leave money on the table. Maybe you can get $20 worth of theater ticket sales once in a while outa somebody that otherwise won't subscribe to prime.
Here, it's just a bunch of idiots who hate the West in general (and the United States in particular), trying to give the Western security apparatus a black eye. I fail to see how leaking our game plans to enemies and competitors is going to make us any safer.
No it won't make us safer. It may make us better.
Like it or not, the West is the light on the hill for the whole world. People who believe otherwise should imagine the whole world being run along Chinese, Russian or Islamist lines... The West does a lot of bad shit, but we are choir boys, compared to the rest of the world.
And what keeps us choir boys? Think about it this way sometimes pragmatism does force us to do things that we nominally consider against or characters. Sometimes we may think we need an internment camp, or a gitmo, or a mass surveillance program, or to allow our officals to operate above or outside our law, etc. Sometimes we may think there is a need to relax or strip away a protections like our bill of rights. I offer no statement on if the ends justified the means in any specific case; I will say its the slipperiest of slopes or the most difficult of lines to walk.
If you want us to remain the chior boys than ONLY transparency and a vigorous and rigorous public debate about these choices their merit at the time and their on going merit will keep us free, or offer us any chance of returning to our core values after we (hopefully) temporarily abandon them. So yes the public has a right to know, and there is a public interest, there is always a public interest.
It is all BS. Think for 15 seconds and its plain as day it has to be BS. If the NSA had a persistent backdoor into the DPRK's systems why would they admit it now? If I had access to my enemies networks, why in heavens name would I reveal that to them AFTER they demonstrated capability and willingness to conduct attacks of their own? Nope does not hold water now more than ever I would be concerned about protecting my secret access so I could be continue to monitor for future attacks, and have a path to stop them or retaliate.
No if anything they would have intervened before the attacks to prevent them, if they knew. They would never sensibly admit to having access afterward. Now just having access does not mean that you can do enough monitoring and ex-filtrating to just go fishing for what they might be up to without getting busted. You can't hide disk IO if you run constant searches will notice eventually in alot of cases. So I find it plausible they did not know about the attack but could verify it was DPRK after the fact but there is no way they'd admit that is how they knew publicly.
That would be trashing an intelligence asset for no gain. Its like chess sometimes you sacrifice a man, but you make damn sure you get something for it.
The vast vast majority of municipalities and vehicles are not subject to emissions testing. So for most people it won't be an issue, except when if diagnostics are needed.
Most mechanics are already pretty used to applying stickers etc, where states/counties require safety inspections, if customers want the convenience I am sure the major insurers can mail these folks a roll of stickers they can reapply; under threat of not being able to obtain additional stickers and inconveniencing their customers if they don't handle the stickers properly.
Everyone else just gets a weeks grace period or whatever to swing by their local branch office and get their agent to apply a new sticker.
I am not saying its a great solution but probably more workable than you think.
Finally maybe the devices could be designed to offer a pass through so you can connect an additional ODBII devices, the device could just proxy the commands and responses, maybe the state would not allow if for emissions tests, but your mechanic could still get his diagnostic info.
Yes but we are the good guys remember, so it okay. Also remember we are supposed to judge people by their actions, not their nationality or ethnicity unless they are Americans than obviously they are good.
See the trouble with that is unless he can be sure, that in the event of an accident he is able to remove the device and conceal any evidence of tampering, at the scene he will be awful unhappy when they deny his claim and prosecute him for fraud.
All the fancy computer security aside, they could probably just use one of those stickers that leaves 'void' behind when you pull it off applied by the agent across the device where it meets the ODBII/III connector.
Look at any engineering program in the US -- how many pakistani / arab students are there? How hard would it be for someone actually motivated to use such a device to find one of these students who either already had resentment towards the west, or had family back home who could be used as leverage?
Impossible no, but there is always going to be risk in a free society. I suspect there are not that many engineering students that take the 72 virgins stuff literally, and more than there are those who fear going into the woods because Satan might be waiting. They are engineering students because they have talent, aspirations, and opportunity. Could they use that opportunity to be a suicide terrorist, yes they could, but most of them certainly feel they worked hard to get where they are and want something better for it than to die young. Long story short they are like you or I.
The use their family as leverage part is probably more realistic. Hard to say what someone will do if you tell them you are holding their sister who you will rape to death if they don't follow instructions, but that is still unlikely. That would require these guys have operatives to identify Arab students who they can trace family back to a home country where they can grab them and hold them. Conditions must be such that the victim would need to believe going to the authorities won't work. If its Saudi Arabia or something where the state department can make a few phone calls and get someone picked up, that is probably how that will go.
I am all for tightening up our boarders and strictly enforcing our immigration laws. We should close the tourism visa loop hole. We should make sure everyone who comes here from abroad gets background check and people with criminal backgrounds including things that we consider felonies should be denied; as should those who have known militant associations. We should locate and deport people who let visa's expire quickly; no excuses. Being out of immigration compliance should result in being permeately bared from entry to all US territories in the future.
What we don't need/want to do is get all twitchy and suspicious about folks here. If they came here legal and are obeying the same laws you and I obey we should treat them like we treat each other. This is important for our society, its kinda what America is supposed to mean.
Probably because most of the terrorists are not thinkers. These guys are still trying to set off some m80s in the back of a car next to a propane cylinder and expecting something exiting to happen. Essentially they are not smart enough to put something like that together that actually works without help. They are not smart enough to solicit help without getting caught either.
It will happen eventually but its going to have to be some relatively intelligent person who has gone of the deep end for one reason or another. Probably it will be Timothy McVeigh type who does it in a 'western' nation first. The Islamists might do it in Iraq/Yemen/Syria/*istan where their infrastructure is but so far 9/11 and the Subway bombing has been only cases where they recruited actors who are not some combination of overly stupid or overly deranged to successfully pull off something more complex than 'run and gun'.
The other thing is the smarter Islamists know they have a large enough pool of the stupid and deranged that they need only get a handful of AKs into their hands and some ammo and they have a reliable suicide attack. There will be much higher probability of failure trying to deliver IEDs from drones and given current constraints on the tech available at your local hobby shops and hardware store little chance of doing damage that is much greater. So in a sense its 'smarter' to put some AKs into the hands of some baffoon you have convinced is on his way to 72 virgins.
There is a difference between being an intellectual and what the pols and media mean when they say intellectual. As the GP points out G.W. Bush was plenty well educated as has just about every president we have ever elected has been, even early on when that education was less formal.
What the media and the people who state they want an intellectual mean is something very much the opposite. They want insular academics, who regardless of their party membership have 100% confidence in their untested leftist theories, and 100% belief in their excuses for all the failures of those they have tested, and finally and most importantly an ability to maintain enough cogitative dissonance to hold instance ideas like the financial crisis had something to do with inadequate regulation rather than being the logical and eventual consequence of moving to a money system not tied to a commodity but based solely on: regulation.
In short they want a bunch of guys that can earn degrees and look down on the rest of us. I am come on folks these guys are saying things like "lack of transparency is a feature" and lets take advantage of the "public's ignorance of economics to get this done."
We should not be voting for these people...they don't represent us...
Been down this road. Used to live in MN, the power company there came up with this idea of the "Savor Switch" they'd discount your electric bill if they could shut off your AC for short periods.
It gets F'ing hot on prairie sometimes, if you let the inside temp rise the AC could never catch up because on hot days it would rarely cycle off (yes probably should have had a higher tonnage unit). Long story short the switch came off! It sucked, when the power company could it always shut the thing down when you needed it the most and it got miserably hot, even in the 15min before they cycled it back on.
I am all for the smart grid as long as *I* the consumer have veto power. If I *want* to use higher cost peak time power and can easily enable a "don't turn me off flag" that's cool, but I want the decision to be mine to make with my wallet.
Also why don't they encourage folks to install battery banks and inline inverters? Seems like the efficiency of these have gotten pretty good. Tank up the batteries off peak, time or whenever the grid signals surplus power is available and use the stored juice to run the high amperage appliances heat pump/washer/stove/dryer etc if those things need to be used during peak.
How many professional SysAdmins and enterprise users are regularly tinkering with their init settings
Not many which is kind of their point. Init is simple and strait forward, sometimes its simplicity creates its own challenges but once you get those problems solved, you can forget about it for the rest of the support cycle.
Init does the same thing everytime. If stuff starts in the right order once, it will again the next time the box is restarted.
I am not going to claim systemd isn't deterministic, but what it will or won't do might be impacted by side effects. Before you had your daemon start after the db did by calling that init script after the db script. The db rc scrip did something to not return until the database was ready.
No with systemd your service depends on the database. So systemd starts the db, than your daemon, okay but 10 months later the datbase file is 10gigs larger and takes longer to mount maybe the db engine appears to be online to systemd but isn't ready yet, something new happens.....
This is a not as easy to test as a sysadmin. There is a greater chance of surprises, and unknown interactions, by nature of the system being more complex.
I don't hate systemd, something a little more situationally aware than init (I say this as a Slackware user) would probably be nice for desktops and anything portable. I am not sure that is systemd, but it might be. I don't see the risk/reward equation turning up favorable in most of the server situations I have been responsible for or seen. Most of the problems in that space have good domain specific solutions that are strait forward for any decent admin to implement maintain, understand if they are taking over for someone else already; and they don't require a major fork-lifting of software that has proven stable for decades, in many cases.
The only thing that would be nice is a some what generic clustering solution like Windows has. It needs to be able to do things like monitor machines state and arbitrary daemons, as well as move resources like disk arrays around between hosts, swap ip and mac address for virtual ips, etc. That might be something a thing like system finally makes easy(I won't say possible, you can do it now I have seen it but its always highly custom).
Systemd might not be all bad even in the server space, frankly its the speed of adoption and rate of feature growth that worry me more than the changes themselves. It would be nice to see it happen on desktop oriented distos first, get the feature build out mostly done and then migrate the server oriented platforms.
I wonder if we could fuck with this services though by creating a Mozilla addon that inserts this header and fills it with some random garbage on each request. If enough people used it maybe we could DOS their database by filling it with UUID seen only once?
The market only fails because we essentially have a duopoly of nationwide carriers and that is ONLY possible because of regulation, in the first place.
Admittedly its very likely without the likes of the FCC the idea of nation wide cellular carrier being able to exist at all is unlikely. Just think VZW and AT&T had to negotiate with every locality and try to get spectrum easements in the same band but...this isn't the point.
You don't get to have it both ways any more than Libertarians do, you can't blame the market for failures when its already one of the most regulated market segments in existence.
You also need to remember Radio Shack in its original conception was not just a retailer. It was a subsidiary of Tandy, which actually made some of those things. The TRS80 for example and later IBM clones. While not exclusive Radio Shack partially existed as captiptive retail channel for Tandy's other products.
For instance, now you have gun-cases juried only by people knowledgeable about - and presumably pro - weapons. Or finance cases juried only by people who work in finance. Or cases against the judiciary juried by the judiciary themselves.
There are plenty of people such as retired army and other law enforcement personnel, antiques dealers, pawn brokers, etc that would have extensive knowledge of guns and not necessarily have a strong political opinion on gun rights for or against.
The idea of a jury is to be "the man on the street". If you can't explain the crime committed to the man on the street, when he's forced to do nothing BUT listen to you for weeks on end, then maybe that law is too complex to enforce anyway.
Juries are, and always have been, required to understand things way out of their normal scopes. Any half-decent defence/prosecution will get them to the level of knowledge they need quickly. Imagine juries on complex financial fraud cases, or in cases steeped in the interpretation of thousands of separate by-laws. It has to be done, it can be done, and if you can't do it then you won't find much of a career as a lawyer.
The problem isn't teaching them so much as their in ability to assess truthfulness. I could make lots of very misleading statements on tor to someone who knows nothing or very little about it. The jury does not get to ask questions. If they find a statement to sound suspect or overly simplistic its not like a class room where they can ask the professor to elaborate. If the other side makes a contradictory statement about something like tor the jury has to basically decide who they are going to believe. A court should be deciding the facts of the case, did so and so use X to do Y and with intent Z.
Its not there to determine if the tor protocol adequately randomizes the source port, in a way that the FBI's analyst could not use to verify same orign at the exit node point, etc. Just like the jury does not have to establish its possible to bash a skull in with a hammer, its common knowledge a steel hammer has sufficient hardness and offers enough leverage a person of average strength can use it to break bone.
Nobody outside of IT is going to have a clue how tor works.
Plenty of people have hobbies and interests outside of work. Lots of tor knowledge would be hard but you probably don't really need that you just need someone who knows about ip and routing, and tunneling which are common. The litigators should be able to explain the necessary elements of tor to someone with at least that much background. If they can't I'd say they don't understand themselves and therefor haven't got a case.
Should you limit the jury selection to IT professionals?
Limit to IT professionals no but I think a "jury of your peers" really ought to mean people with some knowledge about the tools used in the crime at least as much knowledge as the defendant is supposed to possess. Rather than what most voir dire process seem to do to day which is select for people who know nothing about the issue involved.
If you ran a construction firm and we being prosecuted for fraud or something after a bridge collapse don't you think the jury should have members that know somethings about materials science and masonry? I think that would be fair.
I agree with you in general. There are ways to level the playing field without completely putting up a wall and severing ties, with the rest of the world.
First we need treat labor as the commodity it is. We should do away with our byzantine payroll tax system and replace it with a simple flat tax on dollars used to purchase domestic labor. Even better we could take things little farther and do away with individual income taxes, enact a VAT or national sales tax and simply tax employers on the labor they buy at the same tax rate which is applied to ever other good and service.
We then need to put labor on a per-country tariff schedule. The tax rate should be adjusted according to the buying power of the dollar in the remote market. if the cost of living in $COUNTRY is $0.20 on the dollar to the mean cost of living in the us than the tarrif is $0.80 for every dollar plus the sales tax rate applied to the remaining $0.20. That should create cost parity between over seas employees and American workers. That would be anytime an American legal entity pays a worker in foreign country directly.
Then you toss free trade into the dustbin of history where it belongs. I do feel strongly that would should attempt to set a 'neutral' tariff schedule, and write that into the law. I don't think we want to go down the path of trying to protect inefficient industries. Tariffs on goods should be set according to again based on the relative buying power of the dollar in the country where the bulk of the item by cost originated.
This way if there really is an advantage to producing something like cane sugar in Brazil because the environmental conditions are better for it, the economic advantage to buying Brazilian sugar is not eniterly eliminated. Countries can still specialize.
I am not sure this is what the author is thinking but I have seen companies bring folks in on H1Bs, when they stay for a few years. Then they go home, the company re-hires them in their own country. They hire their own local team, their America co-workers get pink slips.
Its a sneaker variant of 'train your replacements'
With hindsight, NSA should have ceased supporting the dual EC_DRBG algorithm immediately after security researchers discovered the potential for a trapdoor
So really he regrets they got caught trying to insert a backdoor and wishes they would have handled the after math of being busting in a way that might have won back some undeserved trust, but he does not regret attempting back door the algorithm in the first. I read this as "would do it again".
The problem is ISP don't add any value anymore. They essentially only provide network. It used to be that your ISP hosted your home page if you had one, provided you an e-mail domain, provided a POP server so your could fetch that mail when you were good and read, provided your DNS, provided news, and possibly more.
Now they DNS they give you is only so they can stuff ads when your type a domain wrong. If they even offer e-mail nobody uses it. They don't provide hosting space anymore. They really are all about routing packets, and providing shitty tech support.
If the municipal entity is going to manage all the L1 infrastructure, they might as well deliver the L2 and L3 infrastructure as well because those are the easy parts.
GTK actually has lots of good widgets for 'data' not sure what that means exactly, forms, spreadsheets that stuff is there, but you are correct anything complex you will have to build up from more basic controls. I would also characterize GTK as a royal PITA even with glade.
Why don't you like web for POS? Honestly there are plenty of great 'data' interfaces. Building your app an in-process webserver that just binds 127.0.0.1 on some high port. There are plenty of frameworks out there that should make building a POS app UI a breeze and because your app is still a local process if you need to do something like trigger a cash draw that should be just as strait forward as anything else you could do.
The funny part is the role reversal. To make efficient use of the Win 8.x start menu, you either need a touch device or you have to use the keyboard short cuts. Otherwise you are picking up the mouse, locating the startmenu, putting the mouse down to start typing a search string, then picking the mouse back up to click the result.
I use it on my VM, its actually a blazing fast way to find stuff if you go all keyboard, but get the mouse involved and its tedious. I don't have so many desktop applications that anyhting is more than a few clicks away in my organized XFCE doc though on Linux or the old start menu wasn't pretty efficient with the mouse.
Thing is keyboard shortcuts really are probably better and the search function saves the steps of actually defining all those shortcuts.
It makes me laugh though because if I suggested on any Linux UI that a former Windows user learn the keys, I was an apologist for an apparent UI failure. Now all the Windows folks are running around insisting the UI is just fine because its fast with the keyboard!
Schneier's position seems to be "don't worry about your poor ethics, just cover your tracks".
I think you know we now live in a world where you can make a fairly benign statement and their exists a very real possibility someone with an axe to grind may strip it of its context and use it against you. I think you also know that behavior is normative. What is appropriate conversation with say all male company over beers after work, may not be appropriate while still in the office, might not be appropriate if a female colleague has joined you for those beers etc. That stuff might still land on the corporate backup server etc, if someone decides to use their corporate smart phone to video some of your night out. While none of it was ever said while on the clock, or in any official communication never the less through stupidity its found its way onto company assets; suddenly its discoverable etc.
So now that innocent comment between to men who were meeting not as employees of Innertrode, but just to buddies having drinks about how the waitress had a nice ass, can be used to demonstrait a pattern of hostile culture or whatever in some unrelated lawsuit. That is the world we live in. It could work the other way around too, your corporate stuff might get tied up in legal proceedings involving them personally that did not need to involve the company. This alone is why BYOD should be strangled in its cradle anytime someone brings it up. You don't want peoples personal lives tied to corporate assets. You don't want your file/e-mail/backup/messaging server to be evidence in their divorce proceedings, drug trafficking trial, etc.
Essentially my mothers advice is still the best, if you don't want someone to read don't write it down. Don't write it down, don't record it, don't photograph it. Do not keep in your diary under lock and key, do not keep it on your file server protected with AES-256, just don't record it. Also its not destruction of evidence you can't be guilty of deleting something that never existed.
So my advice is NO BYOD period, people putting personal assets on corporate networks should be escorted to HR to receive their pink slip and then out of the building; that should be the policy. As to data retention, yes a good data retention policy is important, but even more important is education on how corporate IT assets should be used, what type of language is never appropriate, not used for personal stuff, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
I am not a medical doctor or any kind of doctor for that matter, but my understanding is many antibiotics are readily passed into urine even in patients with mostly normal kidney and liver function.
Alternatively you could look at it as vertical integration. The premium cable group is really the only segment trying to 'bypass the middle man' the Studio's etc are doing just about anything they can to protect their old distribution model:
1) Sell it to the theaters (period of exclusivity)
2) Sell it to the second run theaters (shorter period of exclusivity)
3) Home video release
4) Streaming (new and constantly tinkered with)
Netflix and Amazon have both discovered the existing content industry merely tolerates them, if anything as way to scape a little more revenue in from folks who otherwise would have just gone the piratebay.{whatever it is this week}. They are not really interesting in offering licensing terms that given the streaming guys much of a "piece of the action" on any valuable properties. So rather than wait around for Studios to 'cut out the middle man' Netflix and Amazon are getting into the content business, makes sense.
The next logical step is for Amazon (who has more capital than Netflix) to go after the other distribution channels, why leave money on the table. Maybe you can get $20 worth of theater ticket sales once in a while outa somebody that otherwise won't subscribe to prime.
Here, it's just a bunch of idiots who hate the West in general (and the United States in particular), trying to give the Western security apparatus a black eye. I fail to see how leaking our game plans to enemies and competitors is going to make us any safer.
No it won't make us safer. It may make us better.
Like it or not, the West is the light on the hill for the whole world. People who believe otherwise should imagine the whole world being run along Chinese, Russian or Islamist lines... The West does a lot of bad shit, but we are choir boys, compared to the rest of the world.
And what keeps us choir boys? Think about it this way sometimes pragmatism does force us to do things that we nominally consider against or characters. Sometimes we may think we need an internment camp, or a gitmo, or a mass surveillance program, or to allow our officals to operate above or outside our law, etc. Sometimes we may think there is a need to relax or strip away a protections like our bill of rights. I offer no statement on if the ends justified the means in any specific case; I will say its the slipperiest of slopes or the most difficult of lines to walk.
If you want us to remain the chior boys than ONLY transparency and a vigorous and rigorous public debate about these choices their merit at the time and their on going merit will keep us free, or offer us any chance of returning to our core values after we (hopefully) temporarily abandon them. So yes the public has a right to know, and there is a public interest, there is always a public interest.
It is all BS. Think for 15 seconds and its plain as day it has to be BS. If the NSA had a persistent backdoor into the DPRK's systems why would they admit it now? If I had access to my enemies networks, why in heavens name would I reveal that to them AFTER they demonstrated capability and willingness to conduct attacks of their own? Nope does not hold water now more than ever I would be concerned about protecting my secret access so I could be continue to monitor for future attacks, and have a path to stop them or retaliate.
No if anything they would have intervened before the attacks to prevent them, if they knew. They would never sensibly admit to having access afterward. Now just having access does not mean that you can do enough monitoring and ex-filtrating to just go fishing for what they might be up to without getting busted. You can't hide disk IO if you run constant searches will notice eventually in alot of cases. So I find it plausible they did not know about the attack but could verify it was DPRK after the fact but there is no way they'd admit that is how they knew publicly.
That would be trashing an intelligence asset for no gain. Its like chess sometimes you sacrifice a man, but you make damn sure you get something for it.
The vast vast majority of municipalities and vehicles are not subject to emissions testing. So for most people it won't be an issue, except when if diagnostics are needed.
Most mechanics are already pretty used to applying stickers etc, where states/counties require safety inspections, if customers want the convenience I am sure the major insurers can mail these folks a roll of stickers they can reapply; under threat of not being able to obtain additional stickers and inconveniencing their customers if they don't handle the stickers properly.
Everyone else just gets a weeks grace period or whatever to swing by their local branch office and get their agent to apply a new sticker.
I am not saying its a great solution but probably more workable than you think.
Finally maybe the devices could be designed to offer a pass through so you can connect an additional ODBII devices, the device could just proxy the commands and responses, maybe the state would not allow if for emissions tests, but your mechanic could still get his diagnostic info.
Yes but we are the good guys remember, so it okay. Also remember we are supposed to judge people by their actions, not their nationality or ethnicity unless they are Americans than obviously they are good.
See the trouble with that is unless he can be sure, that in the event of an accident he is able to remove the device and conceal any evidence of tampering, at the scene he will be awful unhappy when they deny his claim and prosecute him for fraud.
All the fancy computer security aside, they could probably just use one of those stickers that leaves 'void' behind when you pull it off applied by the agent across the device where it meets the ODBII/III connector.
Look at any engineering program in the US -- how many pakistani / arab students are there? How hard would it be for someone actually motivated to use such a device to find one of these students who either already had resentment towards the west, or had family back home who could be used as leverage?
Impossible no, but there is always going to be risk in a free society. I suspect there are not that many engineering students that take the 72 virgins stuff literally, and more than there are those who fear going into the woods because Satan might be waiting. They are engineering students because they have talent, aspirations, and opportunity. Could they use that opportunity to be a suicide terrorist, yes they could, but most of them certainly feel they worked hard to get where they are and want something better for it than to die young. Long story short they are like you or I.
The use their family as leverage part is probably more realistic. Hard to say what someone will do if you tell them you are holding their sister who you will rape to death if they don't follow instructions, but that is still unlikely. That would require these guys have operatives to identify Arab students who they can trace family back to a home country where they can grab them and hold them. Conditions must be such that the victim would need to believe going to the authorities won't work. If its Saudi Arabia or something where the state department can make a few phone calls and get someone picked up, that is probably how that will go.
I am all for tightening up our boarders and strictly enforcing our immigration laws. We should close the tourism visa loop hole. We should make sure everyone who comes here from abroad gets background check and people with criminal backgrounds including things that we consider felonies should be denied; as should those who have known militant associations. We should locate and deport people who let visa's expire quickly; no excuses. Being out of immigration compliance should result in being permeately bared from entry to all US territories in the future.
What we don't need/want to do is get all twitchy and suspicious about folks here. If they came here legal and are obeying the same laws you and I obey we should treat them like we treat each other. This is important for our society, its kinda what America is supposed to mean.
Probably because most of the terrorists are not thinkers. These guys are still trying to set off some m80s in the back of a car next to a propane cylinder and expecting something exiting to happen. Essentially they are not smart enough to put something like that together that actually works without help. They are not smart enough to solicit help without getting caught either.
It will happen eventually but its going to have to be some relatively intelligent person who has gone of the deep end for one reason or another. Probably it will be Timothy McVeigh type who does it in a 'western' nation first. The Islamists might do it in Iraq/Yemen/Syria/*istan where their infrastructure is but so far 9/11 and the Subway bombing has been only cases where they recruited actors who are not some combination of overly stupid or overly deranged to successfully pull off something more complex than 'run and gun'.
The other thing is the smarter Islamists know they have a large enough pool of the stupid and deranged that they need only get a handful of AKs into their hands and some ammo and they have a reliable suicide attack. There will be much higher probability of failure trying to deliver IEDs from drones and given current constraints on the tech available at your local hobby shops and hardware store little chance of doing damage that is much greater. So in a sense its 'smarter' to put some AKs into the hands of some baffoon you have convinced is on his way to 72 virgins.
There is a difference between being an intellectual and what the pols and media mean when they say intellectual. As the GP points out G.W. Bush was plenty well educated as has just about every president we have ever elected has been, even early on when that education was less formal.
What the media and the people who state they want an intellectual mean is something very much the opposite. They want insular academics, who regardless of their party membership have 100% confidence in their untested leftist theories, and 100% belief in their excuses for all the failures of those they have tested, and finally and most importantly an ability to maintain enough cogitative dissonance to hold instance ideas like the financial crisis had something to do with inadequate regulation rather than being the logical and eventual consequence of moving to a money system not tied to a commodity but based solely on: regulation.
In short they want a bunch of guys that can earn degrees and look down on the rest of us. I am come on folks these guys are saying things like "lack of transparency is a feature" and lets take advantage of the "public's ignorance of economics to get this done."
We should not be voting for these people...they don't represent us...
Been down this road. Used to live in MN, the power company there came up with this idea of the "Savor Switch" they'd discount your electric bill if they could shut off your AC for short periods.
It gets F'ing hot on prairie sometimes, if you let the inside temp rise the AC could never catch up because on hot days it would rarely cycle off (yes probably should have had a higher tonnage unit). Long story short the switch came off! It sucked, when the power company could it always shut the thing down when you needed it the most and it got miserably hot, even in the 15min before they cycled it back on.
I am all for the smart grid as long as *I* the consumer have veto power. If I *want* to use higher cost peak time power and can easily enable a "don't turn me off flag" that's cool, but I want the decision to be mine to make with my wallet.
Also why don't they encourage folks to install battery banks and inline inverters? Seems like the efficiency of these have gotten pretty good. Tank up the batteries off peak, time or whenever the grid signals surplus power is available and use the stored juice to run the high amperage appliances heat pump/washer/stove/dryer etc if those things need to be used during peak.
How many professional SysAdmins and enterprise users are regularly tinkering with their init settings
Not many which is kind of their point. Init is simple and strait forward, sometimes its simplicity creates its own challenges but once you get those problems solved, you can forget about it for the rest of the support cycle.
Init does the same thing everytime. If stuff starts in the right order once, it will again the next time the box is restarted.
I am not going to claim systemd isn't deterministic, but what it will or won't do might be impacted by side effects. Before you had your daemon start after the db did by calling that init script after the db script. The db rc scrip did something to not return until the database was ready.
No with systemd your service depends on the database. So systemd starts the db, than your daemon, okay but 10 months later the datbase file is 10gigs larger and takes longer to mount maybe the db engine appears to be online to systemd but isn't ready yet, something new happens.....
This is a not as easy to test as a sysadmin. There is a greater chance of surprises, and unknown interactions, by nature of the system being more complex.
I don't hate systemd, something a little more situationally aware than init (I say this as a Slackware user) would probably be nice for desktops and anything portable. I am not sure that is systemd, but it might be. I don't see the risk/reward equation turning up favorable in most of the server situations I have been responsible for or seen. Most of the problems in that space have good domain specific solutions that are strait forward for any decent admin to implement maintain, understand if they are taking over for someone else already; and they don't require a major fork-lifting of software that has proven stable for decades, in many cases.
The only thing that would be nice is a some what generic clustering solution like Windows has. It needs to be able to do things like monitor machines state and arbitrary daemons, as well as move resources like disk arrays around between hosts, swap ip and mac address for virtual ips, etc. That might be something a thing like system finally makes easy(I won't say possible, you can do it now I have seen it but its always highly custom).
Systemd might not be all bad even in the server space, frankly its the speed of adoption and rate of feature growth that worry me more than the changes themselves. It would be nice to see it happen on desktop oriented distos first, get the feature build out mostly done and then migrate the server oriented platforms.
I wonder if we could fuck with this services though by creating a Mozilla addon that inserts this header and fills it with some random garbage on each request. If enough people used it maybe we could DOS their database by filling it with UUID seen only once?
The market only fails because we essentially have a duopoly of nationwide carriers and that is ONLY possible because of regulation, in the first place.
Admittedly its very likely without the likes of the FCC the idea of nation wide cellular carrier being able to exist at all is unlikely. Just think VZW and AT&T had to negotiate with every locality and try to get spectrum easements in the same band but...this isn't the point.
You don't get to have it both ways any more than Libertarians do, you can't blame the market for failures when its already one of the most regulated market segments in existence.
You also need to remember Radio Shack in its original conception was not just a retailer. It was a subsidiary of Tandy, which actually made some of those things. The TRS80 for example and later IBM clones. While not exclusive Radio Shack partially existed as captiptive retail channel for Tandy's other products.
For instance, now you have gun-cases juried only by people knowledgeable about - and presumably pro - weapons. Or finance cases juried only by people who work in finance. Or cases against the judiciary juried by the judiciary themselves.
There are plenty of people such as retired army and other law enforcement personnel, antiques dealers, pawn brokers, etc that would have extensive knowledge of guns and not necessarily have a strong political opinion on gun rights for or against.
The idea of a jury is to be "the man on the street". If you can't explain the crime committed to the man on the street, when he's forced to do nothing BUT listen to you for weeks on end, then maybe that law is too complex to enforce anyway.
Juries are, and always have been, required to understand things way out of their normal scopes. Any half-decent defence/prosecution will get them to the level of knowledge they need quickly. Imagine juries on complex financial fraud cases, or in cases steeped in the interpretation of thousands of separate by-laws. It has to be done, it can be done, and if you can't do it then you won't find much of a career as a lawyer.
The problem isn't teaching them so much as their in ability to assess truthfulness. I could make lots of very misleading statements on tor to someone who knows nothing or very little about it. The jury does not get to ask questions. If they find a statement to sound suspect or overly simplistic its not like a class room where they can ask the professor to elaborate. If the other side makes a contradictory statement about something like tor the jury has to basically decide who they are going to believe. A court should be deciding the facts of the case, did so and so use X to do Y and with intent Z.
Its not there to determine if the tor protocol adequately randomizes the source port, in a way that the FBI's analyst could not use to verify same orign at the exit node point, etc. Just like the jury does not have to establish its possible to bash a skull in with a hammer, its common knowledge a steel hammer has sufficient hardness and offers enough leverage a person of average strength can use it to break bone.
Nobody outside of IT is going to have a clue how tor works.
Plenty of people have hobbies and interests outside of work. Lots of tor knowledge would be hard but you probably don't really need that you just need someone who knows about ip and routing, and tunneling which are common. The litigators should be able to explain the necessary elements of tor to someone with at least that much background. If they can't I'd say they don't understand themselves and therefor haven't got a case.
Should you limit the jury selection to IT professionals?
Limit to IT professionals no but I think a "jury of your peers" really ought to mean people with some knowledge about the tools used in the crime at least as much knowledge as the defendant is supposed to possess. Rather than what most voir dire process seem to do to day which is select for people who know nothing about the issue involved.
If you ran a construction firm and we being prosecuted for fraud or something after a bridge collapse don't you think the jury should have members that know somethings about materials science and masonry? I think that would be fair.
I agree with you in general. There are ways to level the playing field without completely putting up a wall and severing ties, with the rest of the world.
First we need treat labor as the commodity it is. We should do away with our byzantine payroll tax system and replace it with a simple flat tax on dollars used to purchase domestic labor. Even better we could take things little farther and do away with individual income taxes, enact a VAT or national sales tax and simply tax employers on the labor they buy at the same tax rate which is applied to ever other good and service.
We then need to put labor on a per-country tariff schedule. The tax rate should be adjusted according to the buying power of the dollar in the remote market. if the cost of living in $COUNTRY is $0.20 on the dollar to the mean cost of living in the us than the tarrif is $0.80 for every dollar plus the sales tax rate applied to the remaining $0.20. That should create cost parity between over seas employees and American workers. That would be anytime an American legal entity pays a worker in foreign country directly.
Then you toss free trade into the dustbin of history where it belongs. I do feel strongly that would should attempt to set a 'neutral' tariff schedule, and write that into the law. I don't think we want to go down the path of trying to protect inefficient industries. Tariffs on goods should be set according to again based on the relative buying power of the dollar in the country where the bulk of the item by cost originated.
This way if there really is an advantage to producing something like cane sugar in Brazil because the environmental conditions are better for it, the economic advantage to buying Brazilian sugar is not eniterly eliminated. Countries can still specialize.
I am not sure this is what the author is thinking but I have seen companies bring folks in on H1Bs, when they stay for a few years. Then they go home, the company re-hires them in their own country. They hire their own local team, their America co-workers get pink slips.
Its a sneaker variant of 'train your replacements'
With hindsight, NSA should have ceased supporting the dual EC_DRBG algorithm immediately after security researchers discovered the potential for a trapdoor
So really he regrets they got caught trying to insert a backdoor and wishes they would have handled the after math of being busting in a way that might have won back some undeserved trust, but he does not regret attempting back door the algorithm in the first. I read this as "would do it again".
The problem is ISP don't add any value anymore. They essentially only provide network. It used to be that your ISP hosted your home page if you had one, provided you an e-mail domain, provided a POP server so your could fetch that mail when you were good and read, provided your DNS, provided news, and possibly more.
Now they DNS they give you is only so they can stuff ads when your type a domain wrong. If they even offer e-mail nobody uses it. They don't provide hosting space anymore. They really are all about routing packets, and providing shitty tech support.
If the municipal entity is going to manage all the L1 infrastructure, they might as well deliver the L2 and L3 infrastructure as well because those are the easy parts.
GTK actually has lots of good widgets for 'data' not sure what that means exactly, forms, spreadsheets that stuff is there, but you are correct anything complex you will have to build up from more basic controls. I would also characterize GTK as a royal PITA even with glade.
Why don't you like web for POS? Honestly there are plenty of great 'data' interfaces. Building your app an in-process webserver that just binds 127.0.0.1 on some high port. There are plenty of frameworks out there that should make building a POS app UI a breeze and because your app is still a local process if you need to do something like trigger a cash draw that should be just as strait forward as anything else you could do.
I have to agree, Sched D is pretty basic. I mean if you don't need to do Sched D, chances are you are filling out a 1040A or even an 1040EZ.
If you can file either of those with dime store calculator and No 2 pencil in the time it probably takes to install the tax software.
The funny part is the role reversal. To make efficient use of the Win 8.x start menu, you either need a touch device or you have to use the keyboard short cuts. Otherwise you are picking up the mouse, locating the startmenu, putting the mouse down to start typing a search string, then picking the mouse back up to click the result.
I use it on my VM, its actually a blazing fast way to find stuff if you go all keyboard, but get the mouse involved and its tedious. I don't have so many desktop applications that anyhting is more than a few clicks away in my organized XFCE doc though on Linux or the old start menu wasn't pretty efficient with the mouse.
Thing is keyboard shortcuts really are probably better and the search function saves the steps of actually defining all those shortcuts.
It makes me laugh though because if I suggested on any Linux UI that a former Windows user learn the keys, I was an apologist for an apparent UI failure. Now all the Windows folks are running around insisting the UI is just fine because its fast with the keyboard!
Schneier's position seems to be "don't worry about your poor ethics, just cover your tracks".
I think you know we now live in a world where you can make a fairly benign statement and their exists a very real possibility someone with an axe to grind may strip it of its context and use it against you. I think you also know that behavior is normative. What is appropriate conversation with say all male company over beers after work, may not be appropriate while still in the office, might not be appropriate if a female colleague has joined you for those beers etc. That stuff might still land on the corporate backup server etc, if someone decides to use their corporate smart phone to video some of your night out. While none of it was ever said while on the clock, or in any official communication never the less through stupidity its found its way onto company assets; suddenly its discoverable etc.
So now that innocent comment between to men who were meeting not as employees of Innertrode, but just to buddies having drinks about how the waitress had a nice ass, can be used to demonstrait a pattern of hostile culture or whatever in some unrelated lawsuit. That is the world we live in. It could work the other way around too, your corporate stuff might get tied up in legal proceedings involving them personally that did not need to involve the company. This alone is why BYOD should be strangled in its cradle anytime someone brings it up. You don't want peoples personal lives tied to corporate assets. You don't want your file/e-mail/backup/messaging server to be evidence in their divorce proceedings, drug trafficking trial, etc.
Essentially my mothers advice is still the best, if you don't want someone to read don't write it down. Don't write it down, don't record it, don't photograph it. Do not keep in your diary under lock and key, do not keep it on your file server protected with AES-256, just don't record it. Also its not destruction of evidence you can't be guilty of deleting something that never existed.
So my advice is NO BYOD period, people putting personal assets on corporate networks should be escorted to HR to receive their pink slip and then out of the building; that should be the policy. As to data retention, yes a good data retention policy is important, but even more important is education on how corporate IT assets should be used, what type of language is never appropriate, not used for personal stuff, etc.