How's he going to sue for libel if the post was anonymous and RipOffReport won't reveal their sources? I guess you could do a Jane Doe suit but it's still a long shot...
But the protocol used by Wi-Fi Protected Setup reports back after the first four digits have been entered, and indicates if they are right, which means they can be attacked separately. The last of the eight digits is just a checksum, so having got the first four the attacker only then has to try another 1,000 combinations (identifying the other three digits) and the entire PIN is known.
Wow, that's dumb. I hope this wasn't put together by someone who considers themselves a cryptography professional.
While I agree that the idea here is to push autopay, I pay my Verizon bill by ACH every month and it's not automatic. If they do remove the option to pay by ACH without having an automatic withdrawal agreement, they will have a very angry (soon former) customer on their hands.
I'm not saying it's a business decision I would make, primarily because I would want all my business dealings above-board. The fact that they very well could profit from this pisses me off a little.
Apple's profits from selling the additional warranties in the entire country of Italy is almost certainly more than the fine, so it was a good business decision for them to flout local law if this is all they're going to face.
More than that, in any decently managed software company he would already have signed over the work he did for free in his employment contract, since it has to do with his job. Negotiate first, then do. Switch those steps at your own peril.
Bingo. Domains transferred away from GoDaddy don't cost them money (unless they're also hosted with them, but that's probably less likely than a domain by itself); they probably see dollar signs because it then means that the customer will buy new replacement domains from them.
Yes, compression helps (and is generally done automatically in any good Apache configuration). What helps even more from a user's perspective is combining files; basically, in the backend we combine all our Javascript and CSS (or as much as is reasonable) into one file instead of serving it as multiple, separate files linked to the current page. This cuts down on HTTP requests massively and speeds site loading from a user's perspective. Yahoo has a great list of best practices for speeding up sites if you're interested.
Yup. Google helps us out here. If we're using offsite resources like that, there's a fair likelihood that it's cached in the user's browser even if it's the first time they've visited the site.
No, I think newtgingrich.com should belong to Newt Gingrinch, and that cybersquatting is wrong, more so when it's a person's name. But thanks for the strawman.
First, I am quite certain that some of the money goes to the politician themselves.
Second, removing campaign donations means that one lobby can't position themselves as more "vital" to a person in power than another simply because they gave that person more money when they were running. Campaign donations effectively scale the influence that an organization or person has to the amount of money they can give, and I believe that proportionality shouldn't exist.
I'm a Canadian citizen who immigrated to the United States to be with my wife. If you ever go into politics, we should talk. I have a feeling we'd have a lot of views in common.
Representative democracy can be done right. The way the US is currently operating... isn't it. The problem is corruption, not the system. The system simply needs more checks to prevent the corruption in the first place.
Start with making campaign finance taxpayer-funded and make campaign donations illegal. That alone would cause a shift in the sort of people who want to be politicians because it would remove a lot of the profit motive.
The real problem is that in order to put these checks into place, we'd need our current, mostly corrupt politicians to agree to them.
(Most of) the rest of the country doesn't have this amount of hate for each other. What happened to simply presenting your platform and letting voters decide?
I knew someone would say something like this. I have absolutely no problem with the thermostat being networked. I have a problem with it being remotely accessible from the internet at large.
If there's some reason it has to be accessible from outside the firewall (and is there, really?), tunnel through a VPN.
Farnsworth: Well, as a man enters his 18th decade, he thinks back on the mistakes he's made in life. Amy: Like the heaps of dead monkeys? Farnsworth: Science cannot move forward without heaps!
They're prosecuting the low-hanging fruit. It doesn't matter if he didn't cause as much financial harm, he's easy to prosecute and makes a great example.
Slashdot Mirror
Way ahead of you (though I'm the Canadian) :^)
How's he going to sue for libel if the post was anonymous and RipOffReport won't reveal their sources? I guess you could do a Jane Doe suit but it's still a long shot...
But the protocol used by Wi-Fi Protected Setup reports back after the first four digits have been entered, and indicates if they are right, which means they can be attacked separately. The last of the eight digits is just a checksum, so having got the first four the attacker only then has to try another 1,000 combinations (identifying the other three digits) and the entire PIN is known.
Wow, that's dumb. I hope this wasn't put together by someone who considers themselves a cryptography professional.
While I agree that the idea here is to push autopay, I pay my Verizon bill by ACH every month and it's not automatic. If they do remove the option to pay by ACH without having an automatic withdrawal agreement, they will have a very angry (soon former) customer on their hands.
I'm not saying it's a business decision I would make, primarily because I would want all my business dealings above-board. The fact that they very well could profit from this pisses me off a little.
In our case it doesn't matter. The product requires Javascript, and I do mean requires. We still do our best to lower latency and bandwidth use.
Apple's profits from selling the additional warranties in the entire country of Italy is almost certainly more than the fine, so it was a good business decision for them to flout local law if this is all they're going to face.
More than that, in any decently managed software company he would already have signed over the work he did for free in his employment contract, since it has to do with his job. Negotiate first, then do. Switch those steps at your own peril.
With proper organization
See, it's here where it all falls apart.
Sorry, but we're not going to work around cases like your father-in-law's because they're so rare. As another poster said:
Extreme Edge Case, WONTFIX
Bingo. Domains transferred away from GoDaddy don't cost them money (unless they're also hosted with them, but that's probably less likely than a domain by itself); they probably see dollar signs because it then means that the customer will buy new replacement domains from them.
It's ok, you can say "Monsanto".
If you consider ads the content the site wants to deliver, it makes more sense.
Yes, compression helps (and is generally done automatically in any good Apache configuration). What helps even more from a user's perspective is combining files; basically, in the backend we combine all our Javascript and CSS (or as much as is reasonable) into one file instead of serving it as multiple, separate files linked to the current page. This cuts down on HTTP requests massively and speeds site loading from a user's perspective. Yahoo has a great list of best practices for speeding up sites if you're interested.
Yup. Google helps us out here. If we're using offsite resources like that, there's a fair likelihood that it's cached in the user's browser even if it's the first time they've visited the site.
Abortions for some, miniature American flags for others!
No, I think newtgingrich.com should belong to Newt Gingrinch, and that cybersquatting is wrong, more so when it's a person's name. But thanks for the strawman.
First, I am quite certain that some of the money goes to the politician themselves.
Second, removing campaign donations means that one lobby can't position themselves as more "vital" to a person in power than another simply because they gave that person more money when they were running. Campaign donations effectively scale the influence that an organization or person has to the amount of money they can give, and I believe that proportionality shouldn't exist.
"Buying laws" isn't just a metaphor.
I'm a Canadian citizen who immigrated to the United States to be with my wife. If you ever go into politics, we should talk. I have a feeling we'd have a lot of views in common.
Representative democracy can be done right. The way the US is currently operating... isn't it. The problem is corruption, not the system. The system simply needs more checks to prevent the corruption in the first place.
Start with making campaign finance taxpayer-funded and make campaign donations illegal. That alone would cause a shift in the sort of people who want to be politicians because it would remove a lot of the profit motive.
The real problem is that in order to put these checks into place, we'd need our current, mostly corrupt politicians to agree to them.
(Most of) the rest of the country doesn't have this amount of hate for each other. What happened to simply presenting your platform and letting voters decide?
I knew someone would say something like this. I have absolutely no problem with the thermostat being networked. I have a problem with it being remotely accessible from the internet at large.
If there's some reason it has to be accessible from outside the firewall (and is there, really?), tunnel through a VPN.
A thermostat at a town house the Chamber owns on Capitol Hill at one point was communicating with an Internet address in China
What the fuck is a thermostat doing being accessible from the internet?
Farnsworth: Well, as a man enters his 18th decade, he thinks back on the mistakes he's made in life.
Amy: Like the heaps of dead monkeys?
Farnsworth: Science cannot move forward without heaps!
They're prosecuting the low-hanging fruit. It doesn't matter if he didn't cause as much financial harm, he's easy to prosecute and makes a great example.