One of the engineers from Segway HT was giving a talk at Boston University this afternoon, which I missed because usually they are later in the day. I caught him leaving the building, gliding along on the Segway out onto the slush and snow. I have to just say that I am impressed with its handling given the weather. At least I was surprised, I expected it to fumble around and be difficult to maneuver.
Or riding a Segway is learned skill and you need some experience to handle it in the snow, which I would assume a Segway HT engineer would have.
I have read through a few of the scenarios, and they are great. I haven't read the first in the series though, but I might go back and do that at some time.
Having been Adam's roomate at Drexel a few years back, I can vouch for his very talented security analysis skills, so any work with his name on it gets my seal of approval right off the bat anyhow.
"Their privacy policy confesses this, but that's only because Alexa lost a class-action lawsuit when their toolbar did the same thing, and their privacy policy failed to explain this."
When reading something like this, I look for that one unsupported claim or flaw in logic that allows me to throw the entire theory out and never worry about it again. So, I suppose it's left as an exercise for the reader to determine exactly why they chose to honesty in their privacy policy because of the Alexa debacle and not because of something like, say, that they have no ulterior motive?
Slashdot Mirror
One of the engineers from Segway HT was giving a talk at Boston University this afternoon, which I missed because usually they are later in the day. I caught him leaving the building, gliding along on the Segway out onto the slush and snow. I have to just say that I am impressed with its handling given the weather. At least I was surprised, I expected it to fumble around and be difficult to maneuver.
Or riding a Segway is learned skill and you need some experience to handle it in the snow, which I would assume a Segway HT engineer would have.
I have read through a few of the scenarios, and they are great. I haven't read the first in the series though, but I might go back and do that at some time. Having been Adam's roomate at Drexel a few years back, I can vouch for his very talented security analysis skills, so any work with his name on it gets my seal of approval right off the bat anyhow.
"Their privacy policy confesses this, but that's only because Alexa lost a class-action lawsuit when their toolbar did the same thing, and their privacy policy failed to explain this."
When reading something like this, I look for that one unsupported claim or flaw in logic that allows me to throw the entire theory out and never worry about it again. So, I suppose it's left as an exercise for the reader to determine exactly why they chose to honesty in their privacy policy because of the Alexa debacle and not because of something like, say, that they have no ulterior motive?