That seems kinda stupid. Why announce that they're 'watching you' and give you evidence that they're doing so?
"Hey Agent P, I got a great idea. Let's h4xx0r her laptop, wipe out data, and let her know we're watching her. A member of the press would take that as a warning and not report on it, right?" "Cool. *type type type*"
If you look at any person's laptop you'll find it absolutely coated with spyware. I run PC cleaning workshops for my church. Some of the stuff that comes in should really be nuked from orbit they're so bad. I'm starting to advocate people just start getting Chromebooks because there's not much of an OS to hack and 90% of what people do can be done from a web browser.
Yes. I bought one for my daughter (11) and one for an older person who kept getting her laptop pwn3d. Given the number of parents/grandparents that no longer have the time or ability to have a stable system and just want a browser, this is the perfect solution for them.
I've had a few failures (Kreyos and the Neal Stephenson sword game) but the rest of about two dozen have given me exactly what they promised and I got some really nice items.
Libertarians claim that bad business practices will force bad companies out of business allowing good companies to prosper, but any time a person buys a product from a 'bad' vendor is their own fault for not doing enough research.
Perhaps, and maybe that's the problem. I'm sure they're growing at a really rapid rate. If you grow like that for 10 years, there's going to be a lot of amortized expenses that will catch up if you're growing that quickly every year.
If this were Amazon vs. rinkydink provider, I'd buy that. When it's Google vs. Amazon vs. Microsoft, they have the resources to slug this out for as long as they want.
That link wasn't there originally, nor (IIRC) did it say "estimated".
Given the new information, then it doesn't matter. AWS is running at some sort of loss, but the question is why are they running at a loss. Are they spending lots of money on new infrastructure and scoping out new locations for data centers? That all costs a lot of money to implement and it would show up as a loss. Given how well the rest of the company is doing (AMZN would have had a profit if it were not for AWS), it sounds like revenue from other Amazon operations is going to provide capital for AWS to continue building. AWS isn't going anywhere soon if they're continuing to build out at this rate. There will be a time when the demand starts to plateau and they don't need to spend quite so much every quarter to expand. At that point they start raking in the dollars.
Because it causes panic in the target countries, they flee through porous borders and spread the disease more. Other countries think the problem is fixed, never bother screening at airports or other border crossings and they still get in anyway.
How about this for a counter-question: Why aren't we quarantining Texas?
Yeah this. I can't find a source for this claim. According to Wall Street Journal, AWS' revenue is only a $1.2billion per quarter. It would have to be losing at least $500mil/quarter to make a $2 billion/yr loss. In other words, for every dollar you spend on AWS, they're really losing $.50 or so.
You're still failing at point #2. Why was there insufficient security? Ordinarily you'd think that the user had a poor password, but then you said this:
We can tell because they went public without authorization via a hack. That security was Jennifer Lawrence's responsibility.
And what is precisely why you don't get this. This is an either/or case. Either there was a vulnerability on the part of the cloud vendor, or the end users handled their passwords improperly. Given the number of people involved, it seriously points to the former.
So when a cloud vendor says "we store your photos securely and have your privacy as our #1 goal" or whatnot, that's equivalent to putting photos in an envelope and putting them in a post office? I don't think so. Try another analogy.
It's not black and white at all. A crime was committed.
This is like the old joke of the guy going to the doctor and saying "my arm hurts when I do this" and the doctor says "then don't do it!". You're the doctor.
This is dumb on the level of 'blame the victim' dumb. Should everything online be a cost-benefit analysis now?
You know who should be in trouble? The person/people who stole the photos in the first place
If I have naked selfies printed out in my house[*] and someone comes in and steals them, I won't get "well you shouldn't have naked photos of yourself in the house". I get "hey, they stole items from you!". You don't blame the person that made the lock. You don't blame the person if they left the house unlocked. Breaking and entering is a crime. Full stop. There may be other issues if the criminal acquired a master key or picked the lock, or the lock was faulty to begin with, but the blame lies on the person that walked in without authorization and stole property.
What I do with my personal equipment and how I store it and how it can be accessed isn't your business nor do I have to justify myself to you about it.
Like them or dislike them, the VA has had electronic patient records since the 60s. They've had this nailed so well their software is in use in many hospitals around the country.
That's kinda the point. This wouldn't be any different from putting hidden cameras in your house when the babysitter is over. You're not in a public place, so you should have a reasonable expectation of privacy. You don't lose that expectation just because you were invited into someone else's property.
I'd put a sticker on the window "car has recording technology installed" and maybe a notice on the dash when the car starts or goes into that mode. That's pretty easy to do. Well, not so easy after the fact. Maybe next model year.
That would be a valid point if the two orbiters were exactly the same. They're not. India is much closer to the equator than Florida, so launch costs are significantly reduced. Labor costs are reduced. Material may not need to be shipped as far and thus cost less. Maybe NASA and its suppliers have contracts for materials that are more expensive at a point in time, but avoid fluctuations over a long period of time.
I'd add that this isn't the first mission to Mars that NASA has made. They've been doing iterative approaches to get there for the past 40-ish years. According to Wikipedia, the Viking program (two orbiters, two landers) cost $3.8 billion in FY14 dollars. I think they've done a good job at cost reductions.
Slashdot Mirror
That seems kinda stupid. Why announce that they're 'watching you' and give you evidence that they're doing so?
"Hey Agent P, I got a great idea. Let's h4xx0r her laptop, wipe out data, and let her know we're watching her. A member of the press would take that as a warning and not report on it, right?"
"Cool. *type type type*"
If you look at any person's laptop you'll find it absolutely coated with spyware. I run PC cleaning workshops for my church. Some of the stuff that comes in should really be nuked from orbit they're so bad. I'm starting to advocate people just start getting Chromebooks because there's not much of an OS to hack and 90% of what people do can be done from a web browser.
Maybe. If the pushes are in the right direction it gradually moves the overall discussion in the way you want it to go.
Yes. I bought one for my daughter (11) and one for an older person who kept getting her laptop pwn3d. Given the number of parents/grandparents that no longer have the time or ability to have a stable system and just want a browser, this is the perfect solution for them.
I've had a few failures (Kreyos and the Neal Stephenson sword game) but the rest of about two dozen have given me exactly what they promised and I got some really nice items.
Libertarians claim that bad business practices will force bad companies out of business allowing good companies to prosper, but any time a person buys a product from a 'bad' vendor is their own fault for not doing enough research.
Perhaps, and maybe that's the problem. I'm sure they're growing at a really rapid rate. If you grow like that for 10 years, there's going to be a lot of amortized expenses that will catch up if you're growing that quickly every year.
when libertarians get treated the way they'd treat others in a libertarian utopia.
Caveat emptor.
If this were Amazon vs. rinkydink provider, I'd buy that. When it's Google vs. Amazon vs. Microsoft, they have the resources to slug this out for as long as they want.
That link wasn't there originally, nor (IIRC) did it say "estimated".
Given the new information, then it doesn't matter. AWS is running at some sort of loss, but the question is why are they running at a loss. Are they spending lots of money on new infrastructure and scoping out new locations for data centers? That all costs a lot of money to implement and it would show up as a loss. Given how well the rest of the company is doing (AMZN would have had a profit if it were not for AWS), it sounds like revenue from other Amazon operations is going to provide capital for AWS to continue building. AWS isn't going anywhere soon if they're continuing to build out at this rate. There will be a time when the demand starts to plateau and they don't need to spend quite so much every quarter to expand. At that point they start raking in the dollars.
Because it causes panic in the target countries, they flee through porous borders and spread the disease more. Other countries think the problem is fixed, never bother screening at airports or other border crossings and they still get in anyway.
How about this for a counter-question: Why aren't we quarantining Texas?
Yeah this. I can't find a source for this claim. According to Wall Street Journal, AWS' revenue is only a $1.2billion per quarter. It would have to be losing at least $500mil/quarter to make a $2 billion/yr loss. In other words, for every dollar you spend on AWS, they're really losing $.50 or so.
Their ISP and storage costs will increase to handle the new format and you have to pay for that somehow.
At least they have 4k content.
You're still failing at point #2. Why was there insufficient security? Ordinarily you'd think that the user had a poor password, but then you said this:
We can tell because they went public without authorization via a hack. That security was Jennifer Lawrence's responsibility.
And what is precisely why you don't get this. This is an either/or case. Either there was a vulnerability on the part of the cloud vendor, or the end users handled their passwords improperly. Given the number of people involved, it seriously points to the former.
According to 'blame the victim' mentality, you shouldn't send your e-mail address around and it's your fault you're getting spam.
So when a cloud vendor says "we store your photos securely and have your privacy as our #1 goal" or whatnot, that's equivalent to putting photos in an envelope and putting them in a post office? I don't think so. Try another analogy.
It's not black and white at all. A crime was committed.
This is like the old joke of the guy going to the doctor and saying "my arm hurts when I do this" and the doctor says "then don't do it!". You're the doctor.
http://support.apple.com/kb/ht...
If my account was hacked then that's not the same as leaving my house unlocked. I had a password on it and someone picked the lock.
I guess that's the answer if you blame the victim.
This is dumb on the level of 'blame the victim' dumb. Should everything online be a cost-benefit analysis now?
You know who should be in trouble? The person/people who stole the photos in the first place
If I have naked selfies printed out in my house[*] and someone comes in and steals them, I won't get "well you shouldn't have naked photos of yourself in the house". I get "hey, they stole items from you!". You don't blame the person that made the lock. You don't blame the person if they left the house unlocked. Breaking and entering is a crime. Full stop. There may be other issues if the criminal acquired a master key or picked the lock, or the lock was faulty to begin with, but the blame lies on the person that walked in without authorization and stole property.
What I do with my personal equipment and how I store it and how it can be accessed isn't your business nor do I have to justify myself to you about it.
[*] I do not. You are welcome.
Like them or dislike them, the VA has had electronic patient records since the 60s. They've had this nailed so well their software is in use in many hospitals around the country.
The mainframe market is VERY lucrative.
Probably comes under wiretapping laws and would be a criminal act. Depends on the state. IANAL, YMMV.
That's kinda the point. This wouldn't be any different from putting hidden cameras in your house when the babysitter is over. You're not in a public place, so you should have a reasonable expectation of privacy. You don't lose that expectation just because you were invited into someone else's property.
I'd put a sticker on the window "car has recording technology installed" and maybe a notice on the dash when the car starts or goes into that mode. That's pretty easy to do. Well, not so easy after the fact. Maybe next model year.
That would be a valid point if the two orbiters were exactly the same. They're not. India is much closer to the equator than Florida, so launch costs are significantly reduced. Labor costs are reduced. Material may not need to be shipped as far and thus cost less. Maybe NASA and its suppliers have contracts for materials that are more expensive at a point in time, but avoid fluctuations over a long period of time.
I'd add that this isn't the first mission to Mars that NASA has made. They've been doing iterative approaches to get there for the past 40-ish years. According to Wikipedia, the Viking program (two orbiters, two landers) cost $3.8 billion in FY14 dollars. I think they've done a good job at cost reductions.