Or she's trying to make sure that her lovey-dovey notes to hubby don't get plastered all over the news media when the Obama-ites on the "impartial" committee "investigating" troopergate subpoena everything then leak it all to the press.
"Obama-ites" - noun; The people who started the "Troopergate" investigation before Sarah Palin was announced as the VP pick, and before anyone outside of Alaska even knew she existed.
It's the annoying factor. No one really wants to deal with someone over the phone for something as stupid and simple as a license key because the one they had decided to stop working for an arbitrary reason.
I'd take it a step further and add that it's also the ridiculous factor. If a machine has already been validated once, why is there a need to do it again? I don't know of too many people who would go through the trouble of acquiring a legal copy of a Microsoft product, only to replace it with a pirated copy.
While I can probably agree with you as regards to Huffington Post, we'll part company on the criticism of Media Matters. MM is hardly partisan, and they expend more energy in the way of sourcing and fact checking than any other news source. They slam both sides of the aisle with equal gusto, more often than not by allowing the sources to speak for, and often condemn, themselves.
CNN I was getting for a few days. Seems to have disappeared again.
Here the CNN stuff began to disappear a couple of days ago, only to be replaced by "MSNBC Breaking News" variants. Filters are catching most of it, though.
Even if Google is doing this, why does it matter? How is this affecting privacy? I don't care at all if Google knows that I did a search on ATi motherboards or NASA's R&D or how to pronounce Russian words.
You might not care, and Google might not care, but others may very well be interested, and that is where the privacy concerns come in.
Imagine instead if you were doing a search on terms like "boxcutters", "American Airlines R&D" and "how to speak Farsi". There are quite a few entities out there that, after seeing that, would be very interested in getting to know you a little better.
He also makes the point that DNS cache poisoning can be used to fake MX records in DNS, which will result in e-mail being diverted to the attacker, who can then look at it. If the attacker creates a high-priority MX record, they can read the mail, then disconnect without acknowledging receipt. The originating mailer will then resend to the next-priority MX record, the real one. So the mail reaches its destination without anything in the headers to indicate it was snooped.
Is it just me or does this sound eerily like Echelon?
Unfortunately for Garcia, that included 20,000 photos of her, her friends, and her boyfriend. Since the laptop mostly resided in her bedroom, some of them were taken while she was not clothed.
The user has a choice. The user is not forced to install browser plugins.
That's not always true.
I work for a law firm and there are many government and court related web sites that require some sort of plug-in to view their content. The Medicaid manuals in my state require MS word or a Word viewer AND Adobe Acrobat, court reporter services require e-transcript viewers such as RealLegal and/or specialty audio-visual players instead of Windows Media Player, multiple county courts require DjVu and/or Acrobat, and our Secretary of State's website is entirely done in Flash. Without these plug-ins, these sites are technically useless, so the user is required to install the plug-in.
That's an awful lot of effort for what is essentially a piece of e-mail that is visually identical to the CNN home page. Why not just go there instead?
A computer researcher cloned the chips on two British passports and implanted digital images of Osama bin Laden and a suicide bomber.
So now we can look forward to seeing thousands of people all sporting Osama Bin Laden pictures on their passports. It'll be as fashionable as Che Guevara t-shirts.
The TSA will love it because they can announce that they've caught Bin Laden every day for the next 20 years, thus justifying their continued existence.
I think a bit part of our problem is that life has become so convenient that very very few of us are willing to risk arrest by protesting.
Kind of the whole point, don't you think?
Protesters make a government look bad or, as in the TSA's shining example, monumentally foolish. What better way to silence your critics than to threaten arrest for voicing that opinion? This is a prime example of the "chilling effect". In spite of the bumper stickers on the backs of our SUVs, there are very few "patriots" in this country ready and willing to endure jail time for the principle of free speech.
Welcome the the lower half of the slippery slope, my friends.
Now this little trick to sell you more American Tourister luggage. You know the model? The one with a DHS approved RFID tag built right into the handle of it.
Great. Now I have to go home and microwave my luggage.
You're overlooking the fact that the statistics you cite are for reported crimes, which are not always crimes in the actual sense. A better statistic would be how many reported crimes actually become "true" crimes, in that charges are filed and a penalty imposed. For example, I have a neighbor who likes to call the police every time another neighbor plays his radio too loud. Is that a "crime" in the legal sense? To most people that's a firm "no", but, if the cop decides the noise level violates a local ordinance, then we have a probable "yes", provided the cop actually files the charge, which, in the case of my easily irritated neighbor, is almost never.
People are flawed, that's a given. But to write of the whole of humanity as potential criminals based on a set of easily manipulated statistics is, at worst, offensive, and, at best, naive. The danger is, that by assuming guilt by statistical analysis, you actually foster an environment where people become convinced that their leadership (aka, "the man") is hostile to the point of justifying civil disobedience. You create the criminals you think you fear.
In the future, when Employers look at all this shit about us, and decide that we're not worthy. They go though your criminal record, now it's medical records, they're also getting onto the web to see what sort of stupidity you did as a teen 40+ years ago. I wonder...
It'll be called slavery . . .
Employers always argue that employees are difficult and costly and cut into the bottom line. Slaves, on the other hand, just have to be told what to do. There will be no unions, no health care, and no salaries; hell, you don't even have to house them or feed them, just breed them. It'll be a pure profit promised land.
Well... for starters, we're awash in people of criminal behavior.
WTF?
Normally, I'd feel pity for someone who has allowed themselves to become so disillusioned and terrified of their fellow man that they'd slip into this kind of reactive paranoia, but this is just asinine.
There are around 350 million people in the U.S. and the vast majority have never committed a criminal act in their lives.
However, catering to the sickly weakens our gene pool.
I'll leave it to you to tell Dick Cheney he shouldn't get any more health care for his genetically feeble heart condition. I like not being shot in the face.
Slashdot Mirror
. . . but a small donation to our political party of choice preferred . . .
You'll have to forgive him - it's the flashbacks from the 1950's.
"Obama-ites" - noun; The people who started the "Troopergate" investigation before Sarah Palin was announced as the VP pick, and before anyone outside of Alaska even knew she existed.
True, but a written letter from someone who took the time to hunt down that name and address is far more likely to be noticed.
I'd take it a step further and add that it's also the ridiculous factor. If a machine has already been validated once, why is there a need to do it again? I don't know of too many people who would go through the trouble of acquiring a legal copy of a Microsoft product, only to replace it with a pirated copy.
While I can probably agree with you as regards to Huffington Post, we'll part company on the criticism of Media Matters. MM is hardly partisan, and they expend more energy in the way of sourcing and fact checking than any other news source. They slam both sides of the aisle with equal gusto, more often than not by allowing the sources to speak for, and often condemn, themselves.
One key addition (from the non-profit world):
3) Meeting system requirements dictated by the U.S. government.
Yes, but you are talking about anime - the same animation style that introduced the world to tentacle porn.
Here the CNN stuff began to disappear a couple of days ago, only to be replaced by "MSNBC Breaking News" variants. Filters are catching most of it, though.
You might not care, and Google might not care, but others may very well be interested, and that is where the privacy concerns come in.
Imagine instead if you were doing a search on terms like "boxcutters", "American Airlines R&D" and "how to speak Farsi". There are quite a few entities out there that, after seeing that, would be very interested in getting to know you a little better.
I just hope it's not running BSD. That'd be end of that meme.
Loved the Paris Hilton quote:
Is it just me or does this sound eerily like Echelon?
From the original article at Ars Technica:
Hope they like pictures, because that's about all this fucker's got.
That's not always true.
I work for a law firm and there are many government and court related web sites that require some sort of plug-in to view their content. The Medicaid manuals in my state require MS word or a Word viewer AND Adobe Acrobat, court reporter services require e-transcript viewers such as RealLegal and/or specialty audio-visual players instead of Windows Media Player, multiple county courts require DjVu and/or Acrobat, and our Secretary of State's website is entirely done in Flash. Without these plug-ins, these sites are technically useless, so the user is required to install the plug-in.
That's an awful lot of effort for what is essentially a piece of e-mail that is visually identical to the CNN home page. Why not just go there instead?
So now we can look forward to seeing thousands of people all sporting Osama Bin Laden pictures on their passports. It'll be as fashionable as Che Guevara t-shirts.
The TSA will love it because they can announce that they've caught Bin Laden every day for the next 20 years, thus justifying their continued existence.
Kind of the whole point, don't you think?
Protesters make a government look bad or, as in the TSA's shining example, monumentally foolish. What better way to silence your critics than to threaten arrest for voicing that opinion? This is a prime example of the "chilling effect". In spite of the bumper stickers on the backs of our SUVs, there are very few "patriots" in this country ready and willing to endure jail time for the principle of free speech.
Welcome the the lower half of the slippery slope, my friends.
Great. Now I have to go home and microwave my luggage.
You're overlooking the fact that the statistics you cite are for reported crimes, which are not always crimes in the actual sense. A better statistic would be how many reported crimes actually become "true" crimes, in that charges are filed and a penalty imposed. For example, I have a neighbor who likes to call the police every time another neighbor plays his radio too loud. Is that a "crime" in the legal sense? To most people that's a firm "no", but, if the cop decides the noise level violates a local ordinance, then we have a probable "yes", provided the cop actually files the charge, which, in the case of my easily irritated neighbor, is almost never.
People are flawed, that's a given. But to write of the whole of humanity as potential criminals based on a set of easily manipulated statistics is, at worst, offensive, and, at best, naive. The danger is, that by assuming guilt by statistical analysis, you actually foster an environment where people become convinced that their leadership (aka, "the man") is hostile to the point of justifying civil disobedience. You create the criminals you think you fear.
It'll be called slavery . . .
Employers always argue that employees are difficult and costly and cut into the bottom line. Slaves, on the other hand, just have to be told what to do. There will be no unions, no health care, and no salaries; hell, you don't even have to house them or feed them, just breed them. It'll be a pure profit promised land.
And we will all be going to hell.
WTF?
Normally, I'd feel pity for someone who has allowed themselves to become so disillusioned and terrified of their fellow man that they'd slip into this kind of reactive paranoia, but this is just asinine.
There are around 350 million people in the U.S. and the vast majority have never committed a criminal act in their lives.
I'll leave it to you to tell Dick Cheney he shouldn't get any more health care for his genetically feeble heart condition. I like not being shot in the face.
Just tell them you bought the laptop from a former TSA employee . . .