BellSouth's push is for DSL, not WiFi. One gives you a reasonably reliable, dedicated line, while the other gives you mobility at the cost of reliability and speed. If BellSouth were actually building WiFi towers, you might have a case.
Absent a contract, BellSouth has zero right to order particular behavior from another entity. Abusing their market position like that is one of the criteria of an illegal monopoly. Micro$haft got busted for doing that to some of their OEM's.
It doesn't let you work on email off-line. Also, bringing your messages to your local machine makes them somewhat easier to protect. Are you worried about someone reading your email? Disconnect from the 'net.
(No, it isn't the perfect solution. But I trust my system more than I trust my ISP.)
Then again, I see nothing in the article that suggests such behavior/attitudes isn't learned from parents at an early age.
They need to do a lot more study, involving actual humans, twins separated early, adopted children, blah blah blah.
Nothing to see here, move along. (Never thought I'd actually say that on here, but this article is wildly speculative, with little evidence put forth for a true genetic basis. It fully warrants such a comment.)
Al Gore had no authority to sign any binding international agreement. First, he wasn't the sitting President. Second, even if he were, he would have needed the Senate's approval.
1. As stated, Clinton (a Democrat) didn't sign it either, an undisputed fact that your grandparent conveniently left out.
2. The grandparent tries to lay the blame for the global pollutants at Bush's "refusal" to sign on to the Kyoto Protocol. Never mind that Kyoto would not even begin to counter the levels claimed in the top post.
Remember, inconvenient facts don't matter to people whose political philosophy can be summed up as "It's all Bush's fault!".
First, it's getting Microsoft to admit (tacitly) that their "case" for Office in public institutions is weak, at best, and their arguments are just so much hot air.
Second, they're giving up on at least some of the old "rules of the game." The file format has almost nothing to do with application functionality. Making the format proprietary serves little more than to justify the company lawyers' salaries.
If the review is to be believed, where is the mention of a BIOS boot password? The system shoudn't even boot a floppy disk without approval from the owner. Physical access == root access? Then put a password on it.
But even that isn't enough. What will truly stop people from accessing your data? Volume encryption? Ha! That may work to slow down a thief who has removed the hard disk. But when you mount that volume for normal use, everything inside it is decrypted for the duration of the mount, hence accessible to root.
File information should be visible, only with explicit trust of a user's verified identity.
Information access control and verified identity (and the resulting explicit, rather than implicit, trust) can be quite simple. My company deals with security professionals every day, and they are very pleased with the simultaneous high security and ease of use in our product. We're handling compliance requirements for some tightly-regulated industries, without requiring any changes in the way they do their business.
(Unfortunately for this comment, I've promised not to do any astro-turfing for my company.)
Slashdot Mirror
How much stuff protected by this flawed system isn't really "innovation"?
.GIF, .MP3, and having fun with a laser pointer and a cat.
Think
BellSouth's push is for DSL, not WiFi. One gives you a reasonably reliable, dedicated line, while the other gives you mobility at the cost of reliability and speed. If BellSouth were actually building WiFi towers, you might have a case.
Absent a contract, BellSouth has zero right to order particular behavior from another entity. Abusing their market position like that is one of the criteria of an illegal monopoly. Micro$haft got busted for doing that to some of their OEM's.
If Outlook is the best *nix-incompatible offering Windows has, then the parent has a point.
And I think it's hilarious.
It doesn't let you work on email off-line. Also, bringing your messages to your local machine makes them somewhat easier to protect. Are you worried about someone reading your email? Disconnect from the 'net.
(No, it isn't the perfect solution. But I trust my system more than I trust my ISP.)
At least in California, the data compromise notification law makes a specific exception for encrypted data (which is usually on backup tapes).
In fact, right here on Slashdot, very early this morning.
It will be interesting watching this one play out.
'Scuse me, Ma Bell Jr., aka SBC. I can hear Ernestine now, yanking the wires: "Oops, there went 911!"
Whatever happened to "common carrier" status?
Then again, I see nothing in the article that suggests such behavior/attitudes isn't learned from parents at an early age.
They need to do a lot more study, involving actual humans, twins separated early, adopted children, blah blah blah.
Nothing to see here, move along. (Never thought I'd actually say that on here, but this article is wildly speculative, with little evidence put forth for a true genetic basis. It fully warrants such a comment.)
"If only you could see what I've seen with your eyes..."
Al Gore had no authority to sign any binding international agreement. First, he wasn't the sitting President. Second, even if he were, he would have needed the Senate's approval.
The guy wasn't making a partisan comment.
Yes, he was, for two reasons:
1. As stated, Clinton (a Democrat) didn't sign it either, an undisputed fact that your grandparent conveniently left out.
2. The grandparent tries to lay the blame for the global pollutants at Bush's "refusal" to sign on to the Kyoto Protocol. Never mind that Kyoto would not even begin to counter the levels claimed in the top post.
Remember, inconvenient facts don't matter to people whose political philosophy can be summed up as "It's all Bush's fault!".
Bush didn't sign the Kyoto protocol
Clinton didn't sign it, either. Thankfully, neither one could sign it without the Senate's approval.
You had it coming, suckers!
Uh, excuse me, but who's running more and more Diesel engines? You're not exactly complying with Kyoto either, and you did sign it.
that people are reporting the instabilities. With such a de-motivator to buy the unit, they'll need to strengthen the market campaigns for the games.
Why isn't that a top-level post? Microsoft could learn a lot from it.
Dear Microsoft,
No.
Signed,
Everyone On The Internet
First, it's getting Microsoft to admit (tacitly) that their "case" for Office in public institutions is weak, at best, and their arguments are just so much hot air.
Second, they're giving up on at least some of the old "rules of the game." The file format has almost nothing to do with application functionality. Making the format proprietary serves little more than to justify the company lawyers' salaries.
Until she does the cavity search.
Of course, in San Francisco, you pay extra for that.
I'd like to see a Beowulf cluster of these things running Firefox on Windows.
Wait a minute, what am I saying?!?
NO NO BAD BAD BAD BAD THOUGHTS!!!!!!
The story was "Heinie the Mule": If you try to please everyone, you're going to lose your Heinie.
Yet another "independent" study.
But it does bring the issue out for more open debate. Given the WIPO's attempts to dissuade public debate, that can't be a bad thing.
If the review is to be believed, where is the mention of a BIOS boot password? The system shoudn't even boot a floppy disk without approval from the owner. Physical access == root access? Then put a password on it.
But even that isn't enough. What will truly stop people from accessing your data? Volume encryption? Ha! That may work to slow down a thief who has removed the hard disk. But when you mount that volume for normal use, everything inside it is decrypted for the duration of the mount, hence accessible to root.
File information should be visible, only with explicit trust of a user's verified identity.
Pyramid Brewries has it.
Information access control and verified identity (and the resulting explicit, rather than implicit, trust) can be quite simple. My company deals with security professionals every day, and they are very pleased with the simultaneous high security and ease of use in our product. We're handling compliance requirements for some tightly-regulated industries, without requiring any changes in the way they do their business.
(Unfortunately for this comment, I've promised not to do any astro-turfing for my company.)
what will be next to be placed in a car?
How about a driver who won't be distracted by all the crap that doesn't make the drive any safer?