How about not worrying about a to do list?
If something comes up, do it. If you don't have time, it'll make itself known again that it needs to be done.
If you're really paranoid about your data then don't sell your hard drives, even if you have used US DoD-levels of formatting. Duh.
I work for a university, and we're required to send washed-up systems (including hard drives) to the surplus warehouse, where they're eventually auctioned. Sure, we can destroy the hard disks, but then the surplus warehouse charges us! (Their policy is to charge us for non-working systems, but to take working systems away for free. Pay us? Ha!)
As a cash-poor department in the university, we can't afford to pay to dispose of systems. So we DoD-wipe each one. I'm pretty comfortable with that level of security, but there are some who might not be but be in the same (financially-motivated) situation.
Maybe I should reload all the hard drives with horse porn so they stop looking after they find that...
No, I don't care about people who can't afford to take care of their machine, buy hardware firewalls, virus scanners, etc.
Nice elitist attitude. I hardly think that's fair, much less feasible at this point, to exclude those who can't pay to get rid of something they didn't want in the first place.
Someone already responded to this and said that software solutions are free/inexpensive (ZoneAlarm, et al) but someone else earlier in this thread has also made the point that client software isn't the solution.
Is technology even a viable solution? It seems that the "enemy" (i.e. those who create software for direct mail spamming, and those who create viruses/malware that hijack systems for the purpose of spamming) are always going to be at approximately the same level of technology, which means that what might effectively block spammers on Monday won't work by Thursday. This has happened over and over again. It's a race we can't win.
Someone else here spoke of heads on pikes as a deterrent. While that's nice to contemplate, it won't happen. However, deterrent is key.
The only solution would seem to be enforcement as deterrent. The U.S. Gov't has made some fledgling steps in that direction, but aside from the fact that they've come up with some stupid ways of approaching this, the main problem is that no one government is going to be able to enforce it.
What's needed is a coalition of governments along with the technological powers behind the 'net (ICANN, etc) to actually sit down and agree on the following: That there is a problem; that rules should be made to mitigate the problem; that these rules should be enforced equally in all locales; and that everyone needs to bear the (mostly financial) burden for the enforcement.
I love bartering services. My wife (a doula) does so also. In return for computer services, I've received:
* No beer. (Yuck!)
* Food, much great food. Restaurant owners are great to trade with.
* Chiropractic care.
* House painting.
* Yard work.
* Tree removal.
* Child care.
* Movie tickets.
* Professional house cleaning.
* Unexpected cash (really... sometimes I'm just wanting to help out a friend and they give me cash when I'm not expecting it)
* Automotive work (my mechanic and I regularly trade)
* Artwork
* Other stuff
What's really cool is when you can do regular trades, like I do with my mechanic.
I second the HTML version. Good old Adobe - popped up a nice little window in the background bugging me to update and stalled the IE process. Since the window went to the background, all I could see was the stalled process, and I killed IE, which, of course, closed all my windows. I hate pdf files...
The problem here isn't with PDF files, it's with the user. You can turn off the automatic update check, ya know.
This relates to the main story: The primary problem with security is always the users not using the security processes correctly, and then blaming someone else.
Dell drives me nuts. A friend wanted to add a second hard drive to a Dell system that had one HD and two CD devices. No problem, I thought, until I opened up the case. Turns out there was no drive cage for a second HD. There was plenty of room -- it was a mid-tower and plenty of open space up front -- but they hadn't put one in. Out of curiosity I looked up the tech documents on Dell's site and Dell says: "Dell does not support two hard drives on this system." They imply that it's not technically possible (it was), but what they really mean is that they don't want you to be able to upgrade your system in this way, so that you'll just buy a new Dell instead of upgrading the old one.
I ended up putting the drive in with a combination of velcro and duck tape. Screw Dell.
I truly think that the Best Buy employee training policy is: "If you don't know, make it up." I have caught several Best Buy blueshirts making things up in response to things I've made up. It would be quite amusing if it weren't so sad.
Most people here are missing the point. The point here is not that the Salon guy isn't honoring his TOS, or any of the other objections I've seen so far. It's that he's being morally irresponsible.
Some have mentioned equivalent scenarios such as leaving your gun in your house, and someone stealing it, and then whether or not you should be liable for the damage they do with it.
The difference here is that the writer of the article isn't like just some shmoe hillbilly or weekend hunter who happens to have a gun. These are ordinary people, with valid (or at least plausible) excuses for not securing their property if a mishap occurs. No, the writer is like a cop, who knows full well what happens when guns get stolen, and yet keeps his gun in plain sight in an unlocked cabinet in his unlocked home.
What is important here is not the ability he has to safeguard his stuff, but the knowledge that he's doing something irresponsible. He's trying to fake an insanity plea. He's an out-and-out liar if he tries to claim that he "just didn't know" someone would use his connection.
The other part is that, as a (I assume) at least semi-educated netizen, he should know that it takes everyone's participation to make things better. If MOST of the people who used wireless networks secured their networks, wardriving wouldn't be such a big hobby. If most of the people who used Windows practiced safe patching, antivirus, antimalware and email techniques, Windows wouldn't be such a big target.
He's shuffling the blame. "Let someone else deal with it," he is saying. That's a combination of irresponsibility and laziness.
I leave my car unlocked. Someone steals it and runs down a child at 100mph in a 30 zone. Is it my fault? Sure I may (morally) share some degree of responsibility, but I don't think there's any legal issue. The person who should be punished is the person who committed the crimes (theft, speeding and dangerous driving) not the person who neglected to lock the door (not a crime).
It's the difference between leaving you car unlocked, and leaving your car unlocked with the keys in the ignition and a note on the dash saying "Please use this to run over people".
As for the software, you're simply leasing a copy of it. You don't buy it. What you're purchasing is the distribution media and a license to use the software. (Which license, by the way, can be revoked at any time, according to many software companies terms of use.)
Your bandwidth is likewise leased, unless you happen to buy and bury the cable yourself, and even then you have to connect *somewhere*.
Yeah, I still mourn the passing of an age when AOL went from shipping floppies to shipping CDs. I was happy to get AOL spam in my snailmail because I could resuse those floppies. There are only so many CD crafts that can be made.
Slashdot Mirror
How about not worrying about a to do list? If something comes up, do it. If you don't have time, it'll make itself known again that it needs to be done.
If it had hooks into the OS as deeply as Word does, you wouldn't have that problem.
I'm waiting until it's renamed Thundercrotch. THEN I won't be able to resist it.
I know that was meant as a joke, but it's a short jump from labeling spammers as terrorists to labeling grey hats and P2P downloaders as terrorists...
I work for a university, and we're required to send washed-up systems (including hard drives) to the surplus warehouse, where they're eventually auctioned. Sure, we can destroy the hard disks, but then the surplus warehouse charges us! (Their policy is to charge us for non-working systems, but to take working systems away for free. Pay us? Ha!)
As a cash-poor department in the university, we can't afford to pay to dispose of systems. So we DoD-wipe each one. I'm pretty comfortable with that level of security, but there are some who might not be but be in the same (financially-motivated) situation.
Maybe I should reload all the hard drives with horse porn so they stop looking after they find that...
Nice elitist attitude. I hardly think that's fair, much less feasible at this point, to exclude those who can't pay to get rid of something they didn't want in the first place.
Someone already responded to this and said that software solutions are free/inexpensive (ZoneAlarm, et al) but someone else earlier in this thread has also made the point that client software isn't the solution.
Is technology even a viable solution? It seems that the "enemy" (i.e. those who create software for direct mail spamming, and those who create viruses/malware that hijack systems for the purpose of spamming) are always going to be at approximately the same level of technology, which means that what might effectively block spammers on Monday won't work by Thursday. This has happened over and over again. It's a race we can't win.
Someone else here spoke of heads on pikes as a deterrent. While that's nice to contemplate, it won't happen. However, deterrent is key.
The only solution would seem to be enforcement as deterrent. The U.S. Gov't has made some fledgling steps in that direction, but aside from the fact that they've come up with some stupid ways of approaching this, the main problem is that no one government is going to be able to enforce it.
What's needed is a coalition of governments along with the technological powers behind the 'net (ICANN, etc) to actually sit down and agree on the following: That there is a problem; that rules should be made to mitigate the problem; that these rules should be enforced equally in all locales; and that everyone needs to bear the (mostly financial) burden for the enforcement.
I don't see that happening any time soon, though.
I love bartering services. My wife (a doula) does so also. In return for computer services, I've received:
* No beer. (Yuck!)
* Food, much great food. Restaurant owners are great to trade with.
* Chiropractic care.
* House painting.
* Yard work.
* Tree removal.
* Child care.
* Movie tickets.
* Professional house cleaning.
* Unexpected cash (really... sometimes I'm just wanting to help out a friend and they give me cash when I'm not expecting it)
* Automotive work (my mechanic and I regularly trade)
* Artwork
* Other stuff
What's really cool is when you can do regular trades, like I do with my mechanic.
The problem here isn't with PDF files, it's with the user. You can turn off the automatic update check, ya know.
This relates to the main story: The primary problem with security is always the users not using the security processes correctly, and then blaming someone else.
Huh. Movies based on anti-spyware utilities. You'd think that Norton Antivirus would get a movie first, I mean, that's WAY more action-oriented.
Dell drives me nuts. A friend wanted to add a second hard drive to a Dell system that had one HD and two CD devices. No problem, I thought, until I opened up the case. Turns out there was no drive cage for a second HD. There was plenty of room -- it was a mid-tower and plenty of open space up front -- but they hadn't put one in. Out of curiosity I looked up the tech documents on Dell's site and Dell says: "Dell does not support two hard drives on this system." They imply that it's not technically possible (it was), but what they really mean is that they don't want you to be able to upgrade your system in this way, so that you'll just buy a new Dell instead of upgrading the old one.
I ended up putting the drive in with a combination of velcro and duck tape. Screw Dell.
I truly think that the Best Buy employee training policy is: "If you don't know, make it up." I have caught several Best Buy blueshirts making things up in response to things I've made up. It would be quite amusing if it weren't so sad.
You do know the difference between grammar and spelling, don't you?
Most people here are missing the point. The point here is not that the Salon guy isn't honoring his TOS, or any of the other objections I've seen so far. It's that he's being morally irresponsible.
Some have mentioned equivalent scenarios such as leaving your gun in your house, and someone stealing it, and then whether or not you should be liable for the damage they do with it.
The difference here is that the writer of the article isn't like just some shmoe hillbilly or weekend hunter who happens to have a gun. These are ordinary people, with valid (or at least plausible) excuses for not securing their property if a mishap occurs. No, the writer is like a cop, who knows full well what happens when guns get stolen, and yet keeps his gun in plain sight in an unlocked cabinet in his unlocked home.
What is important here is not the ability he has to safeguard his stuff, but the knowledge that he's doing something irresponsible. He's trying to fake an insanity plea. He's an out-and-out liar if he tries to claim that he "just didn't know" someone would use his connection.
The other part is that, as a (I assume) at least semi-educated netizen, he should know that it takes everyone's participation to make things better. If MOST of the people who used wireless networks secured their networks, wardriving wouldn't be such a big hobby. If most of the people who used Windows practiced safe patching, antivirus, antimalware and email techniques, Windows wouldn't be such a big target.
He's shuffling the blame. "Let someone else deal with it," he is saying. That's a combination of irresponsibility and laziness.
I sympathize, but... you're not quite right here.
It is your computer, bought and paid for.
As for the software, you're simply leasing a copy of it. You don't buy it. What you're purchasing is the distribution media and a license to use the software. (Which license, by the way, can be revoked at any time, according to many software companies terms of use.)
Your bandwidth is likewise leased, unless you happen to buy and bury the cable yourself, and even then you have to connect *somewhere*.
Yeah, I still mourn the passing of an age when AOL went from shipping floppies to shipping CDs. I was happy to get AOL spam in my snailmail because I could resuse those floppies. There are only so many CD crafts that can be made.
Sold? Try copied.
Seventy-three percent of those surveyed by Consumer Reports said Web solutions are hard to find, navigate or don't work at all.
Not true, you just need to look beyond the company's support page. Yes, I mean Google.
The problem is that then everyone will have a huge penis, and "huge" being relative, the cycle will start all over again.