So go back and count them! That's not what the Dems did. They tracked these individuals done, which is tantamount to intimidation and coercion. The entire process is dependant upon the voter's confidence that their vote will be a) counted and b) confidential. Having Democrat (I refuse to say Democratic anymore) operatives show up and ask you how you MEANT to vote is just ridiculous.
The issue is the Democrats blatantly altering the election process to favor their candidate. What happened was that the ballots in King County were thrown out as a result of missing or mismatched signatures. The Democrats then tried (and succeeded) to get the ability to contact each of those voters individually to verify their signature and vote. This is a blatant abuse of the process. Some Democrat operative shows up your house wanting to know if you didn't really mean to vote for their candidate. And the Democrats are the ones always whining about voter intimidation??? Disgusting. There's a reason that elections aren't run like this...
Well, we don't have a list of user accounts, but if I try to add a new account that already exists then I can't. I realize that they probably have everyone in a database, and I guess if this guy got that database it would surely contain email addresses or usernames. I guess I was thinking in the terms that the article was speaking: "list of email addresses."
If AOL wasn't selling it's email list to spammers, why was there a "list" at all??? I don't know about anyone else, but we most certainly don't keep a "list" of email addresses, or even user accounts, around anywhere. I realize that he still could have found out the accounts, but the story makes it sound like he had a pretty easy time doing it because AOL had this "list" (presumably a database) of user accounts/email addresses. Noone else finds this somewhat odd???
Yes, but in modern times it is now the left that wants to take all of your rights away and that fights against the liberal ideas that this country is founded upon. Examples?
You don't know for a fact that he had no permission from the company to access this data. If another employee gave him the access code they are, like it or not, they are being granted a license to access what ever data and resources are associated with that account. This would be *stupid* and ground for dismissal but in it self hardly a criminal act.
And this is why security policies are so important. If AOL's security policy explicitly states that no user is allowed to access another user's account, even if that user was given the password, then it is illegal because it would be unauthorized use of a computer. The computer doesn't belong to the user, and therefore the user has no right to authorize anyone else to use their account. It all depends on what AOL has stated in their security policy.
My biggest Gmail complaints:
1. Spam filters suck. You mark a message as spam and it's like Gmail ignores you.
2. No Opera support.
3. No groups in your contact list.
I was thinking something similar. Starting your corporate Open Source proposal with "Well, the guys on this site called Slashdot said..." may not go over real well.:P
but if successful I am guessing 90% of home desktop users will not even notice any difference.
Oh, come ON! I realize that most/.ers think that everyone around them is a drooling idiot, but you don't think that someone would notice that what used to be Office XP is now Openoffice??? I prefer Openoffice, but it is definitely not as visually appealing as Office XP. This is just more ridiculousness from the zealot crowd (I much prefer Linux to Winndows for technical reasons rather than pseudo-religious ones). I just wish people would stop trying to attribute mental retaradation to everyone not running Debian.
Were you given a chance to present an opposing opinion? I am fortunate enough to work for a company that knows the value of having in-house IT. Even when we bring outside consultants in, my boss and those above her understand that you simply cannot replace having someone in-house who knows every intricate detail. I was thinking that perhaps if you were given a chance to present the pros of having in-house infosec you may have been able to make a strong enough case for staying.
The MSNBC article is the exact same article. The link to moviemistakes.com easily should have (or could have) been referenced in a comment on the original story. This is a dupe.
I hate Bill O'Reilly, too. Although let's be clear that noone, not even Bill, pretends that the "No Spin Zone" is about news. It's about Bill O'Reilly's ideas about the news. Noone contends that. The problem with the NY Times is that it's political propaganda dressed up like news.
However, the NY Times is not news, it's propaganda. So if you choose to be spoon-fed your opinion on politics and world events, by all means read the Times.
The CMS we have been using since the beginning of 2003 is a customized commercial option, Microsoft Content Management System 2002. The reasons for the choice of Microsoft 2002 were manifold: Microsoft made a serious commitment to the MIT OCW project, the total cost of ownership of Microsoft CMS 2002 was significantly lower than the other vendors in consideration, and the Microsoft product offered a high-level of usability for the end-users, MIT OCW's faculty liaisons and MIT's faculty. The entire MIT OCW Web site is now published dynamically out of the customized CMS.
What? Microsoft getting positive exposure on Slashdot? I think I just saw a pig fly past my window on his way to a frozen hell.
Slashdot Mirror
I was told that it's 127.0.0.1. Took me about five seconds to hack in. Morons didn't even have a firewall...
Porn isn't in the mix? Janet Jackson beat out John Kerry...what does that tell you?
So go back and count them! That's not what the Dems did. They tracked these individuals done, which is tantamount to intimidation and coercion. The entire process is dependant upon the voter's confidence that their vote will be a) counted and b) confidential. Having Democrat (I refuse to say Democratic anymore) operatives show up and ask you how you MEANT to vote is just ridiculous.
I run an Exchange 2000 environment, and I use Evolution with the Exchange Connector and it works great.
The issue is the Democrats blatantly altering the election process to favor their candidate. What happened was that the ballots in King County were thrown out as a result of missing or mismatched signatures. The Democrats then tried (and succeeded) to get the ability to contact each of those voters individually to verify their signature and vote. This is a blatant abuse of the process. Some Democrat operative shows up your house wanting to know if you didn't really mean to vote for their candidate. And the Democrats are the ones always whining about voter intimidation??? Disgusting. There's a reason that elections aren't run like this...
Well, we don't have a list of user accounts, but if I try to add a new account that already exists then I can't. I realize that they probably have everyone in a database, and I guess if this guy got that database it would surely contain email addresses or usernames. I guess I was thinking in the terms that the article was speaking: "list of email addresses."
If AOL wasn't selling it's email list to spammers, why was there a "list" at all??? I don't know about anyone else, but we most certainly don't keep a "list" of email addresses, or even user accounts, around anywhere. I realize that he still could have found out the accounts, but the story makes it sound like he had a pretty easy time doing it because AOL had this "list" (presumably a database) of user accounts/email addresses. Noone else finds this somewhat odd???
Many read, but few comment. Just for clarification. :)
You don't know for a fact that he had no permission from the company to access this data. If another employee gave him the access code they are, like it or not, they are being granted a license to access what ever data and resources are associated with that account. This would be *stupid* and ground for dismissal but in it self hardly a criminal act.
And this is why security policies are so important. If AOL's security policy explicitly states that no user is allowed to access another user's account, even if that user was given the password, then it is illegal because it would be unauthorized use of a computer. The computer doesn't belong to the user, and therefore the user has no right to authorize anyone else to use their account. It all depends on what AOL has stated in their security policy.
If I only had some mod points... funniest post I've seen so far this morning.
Something Hollywood finds next to impossible. I couldn't agree more.
Ted Kennedy and Edward Kennedy are the same person...dolt.
My biggest Gmail complaints: 1. Spam filters suck. You mark a message as spam and it's like Gmail ignores you. 2. No Opera support. 3. No groups in your contact list.
I was thinking something similar. Starting your corporate Open Source proposal with "Well, the guys on this site called Slashdot said..." may not go over real well. :P
but if successful I am guessing 90% of home desktop users will not even notice any difference.
/.ers think that everyone around them is a drooling idiot, but you don't think that someone would notice that what used to be Office XP is now Openoffice??? I prefer Openoffice, but it is definitely not as visually appealing as Office XP. This is just more ridiculousness from the zealot crowd (I much prefer Linux to Winndows for technical reasons rather than pseudo-religious ones). I just wish people would stop trying to attribute mental retaradation to everyone not running Debian.
Oh, come ON! I realize that most
It's time to go to the mattresses. Let's make those daemons an offer they can't refuse.
Were you given a chance to present an opposing opinion? I am fortunate enough to work for a company that knows the value of having in-house IT. Even when we bring outside consultants in, my boss and those above her understand that you simply cannot replace having someone in-house who knows every intricate detail. I was thinking that perhaps if you were given a chance to present the pros of having in-house infosec you may have been able to make a strong enough case for staying.
The MSNBC article is the exact same article. The link to moviemistakes.com easily should have (or could have) been referenced in a comment on the original story. This is a dupe.
Nothing like stereotyping an entire segment of the population. Rather close-minded don't you think? And what do YOU drive?
What exactly is the problem with SUV drivers again?
techies are so egotistically arrogant
Is there a type of arrogance that is not egotistical that I am not aware of?
I hate Bill O'Reilly, too. Although let's be clear that noone, not even Bill, pretends that the "No Spin Zone" is about news. It's about Bill O'Reilly's ideas about the news. Noone contends that. The problem with the NY Times is that it's political propaganda dressed up like news.
However, the NY Times is not news, it's propaganda. So if you choose to be spoon-fed your opinion on politics and world events, by all means read the Times.
From the FAQ:
The CMS we have been using since the beginning of 2003 is a customized commercial option, Microsoft Content Management System 2002. The reasons for the choice of Microsoft 2002 were manifold: Microsoft made a serious commitment to the MIT OCW project, the total cost of ownership of Microsoft CMS 2002 was significantly lower than the other vendors in consideration, and the Microsoft product offered a high-level of usability for the end-users, MIT OCW's faculty liaisons and MIT's faculty. The entire MIT OCW Web site is now published dynamically out of the customized CMS.
What? Microsoft getting positive exposure on Slashdot? I think I just saw a pig fly past my window on his way to a frozen hell.