Years ago I worked at a defense shop that got the idea people were using passwords that were too easy to guess. So they assigned your password every 30 days. You get assigned something like "3z~L8;GS=4", which would be changed before you could remember it without some kind of mnemonic trick ("Three Zebras Tried Laughing..."). After a few months you'd start mixing up the current password with passwords from last month or the month before.
Anyway, they finally did an audit and found something like 70% of their employees had their password written on a scrap of paper and placed in their right top desk drawer. I would have bet money if they went through wallets and purses they would have gotten nearly 100%. They changed the policy to one that's common today - you pick the password but it can't be too easy to crack.
If I were trying to hack into your DMZ I'd be trying passwords like "January2016" and "J4nu4ry2016". If you put a policy in place like that one of two things is going to happen: people will choose passwords with the same pattern, or they'll write the passwords down. You're lucky if it's the latter.
The cattle futures should have sent her to jail thirty years ago. If not the cattle futures, then the Rose Law documents. If not the Rose Law documents, then the Clinton Global Initiative pay-for-play.
If it was just a question of Trump or not-Trump the decision would be a lot easier. Trump is something of a carnival barker (though no fool), but I don't want to be normalizing corruption by voting for Clinton.
I'm curious to see whether he ends up with more customers, and their demographics. My male friends would be perfectly happy drinking in a place without cell phones, but the women I know (mostly middle aged MC-UMC) would go into shock if you kept them from Facebook for any length of time.
It's not illegal in the US. But you would be taking the chance of getting sued when a customer had a medical emergency and nobody could call emergency services. You could just keep an old-fashioned phone behind the bar for emergencies, assuming you were willing to deal with customers constantly begging to use it.
Instead of going to the toilet they'll step out the back door and make the call from behind a dumpster. This is a pub we're talking about, not the Mall of America.
The plant's not going to build itself, which means thousands of people kicking up dust over those six months, and even after it's complete there will need to be people there to maintain it.
I'm seeing more and more people using Apple desktops and laptops for all sorts of software development. Developing anything but windows-only software on a Windows system is just painful, and Linux desktops still have a dearth of everyday business-necessary applications (like Office). The Mac gives you the best of both worlds.
Except that they're not actually funneling it to Ireland. These are profits subsidiaries made in Europe that were never moved to the US. As I noted in another comment, there are multinationals that play games with IP and offset pricing schemes to move money into non-US markets, but to all indications Apple isn't one of them. Cook has been pretty clear about that over the years, deriding what other companies are doing as "accounting games".
The idea Apple doesn't pay enough US taxes to cover any possible use of US infrastructure beggars belief - the company paid over eight billion in 2014 alone. Apple pays US taxes on all US sales - what Stiglitz is saying is somehow Apple should pay US taxes on profits from European sales.
When a device is made in China and shipped to and sold in Germany, what US infrastructure is Apple using that needs to be supported with additional billions of dollars every year? Yes, there are some companies that do shady things like sell IP to subsidiaries and then pay huge fees to use their own IP, shifting US profits to the subsidiaries. But Apple is in a small subset of US corporations that doesn't play those kinds of accounting games.
Were I Tim Cook I'd move Apple to Ireland just to hear idiots like Stiglitz try to explain why Apple should still pay US taxes on every penny it makes everywhere.
That is speculative, to be kind. You have absolutely no way to prove that the email server was setup for that purpose. To demonstrate their intent you would need something that you have no evidence to support.
Typically later actions are enough to prove intent. You're really bending over backward to give her the benefit of the doubt, and I understand that. But if it were you or I this is extra jail time.
Yes, that's tampering with evidence. Try pulling this kind of nonsense if you're involved with a subpoena and see what happens. Prosecutors and judges will not accept "You can't prove what I deleted has any connection to the case" as a valid defense.
I used to be good friends with a theater owner. He told me he actually loses money on the tickets - all of it and more went to the movie distributer. The food was expensive because that's where some of his expenses and all his profit came from.
Yes, and this falls within that meaning because the point was to evade official records statutes and control evidence of other wrongdoing.
There is no evidence whatsoever that the emails were lost after the subpoena was issued.
Lost? You mean, "lost" as in misplaced, or "lost" as in deliberately deleted? That's not a typical usage of the word "lost". And yes, we know it happened after the subpoena because Hillary's lawyers have admitted the process they used to comply with the subpoena. And this is kind of joke all on its own: They searched all the email for a handful of keywords and deleted the everything else. So they searched for "Libya" but not, say, "Lib", which would be a common abbreviation, along with probably "L". No judge would have tolerated that from a normal person.
In this country the judge does need a reason to hand out a sentence that long. No such reason has been established yet in this case.
Tampering with evidence carries a maximum sentence of twenty years. On top of that we have criminal contempt of court and destruction of federal records.
If you or I got a subpoena to produce emails from an illegal email system, then we produced a tiny fraction of the emails and deleted the rest, the judge would be shaking his head and muttering "the balls on this guy" as he threw us in jail for decades.
Inciting? That's an odd spin - they can't break in and steal those emails now because she deleted them. All he's saying is he wants them to release emails they already have. Which, you know, don't actually exist according to Clinton.
This is a great move, because there's no way Clinton can hid the fact she broke the law, then broke the law again when she deleted emails she was legally obligated to produce. There's a reason Trump is ahead in the latest polls.
Slashdot Mirror
Years ago I worked at a defense shop that got the idea people were using passwords that were too easy to guess. So they assigned your password every 30 days. You get assigned something like "3z~L8;GS=4", which would be changed before you could remember it without some kind of mnemonic trick ("Three Zebras Tried Laughing..."). After a few months you'd start mixing up the current password with passwords from last month or the month before.
Anyway, they finally did an audit and found something like 70% of their employees had their password written on a scrap of paper and placed in their right top desk drawer. I would have bet money if they went through wallets and purses they would have gotten nearly 100%. They changed the policy to one that's common today - you pick the password but it can't be too easy to crack.
If I were trying to hack into your DMZ I'd be trying passwords like "January2016" and "J4nu4ry2016". If you put a policy in place like that one of two things is going to happen: people will choose passwords with the same pattern, or they'll write the passwords down. You're lucky if it's the latter.
You don't floss to prevent cavities. That's why you brush. The flossing is keep your teeth from rotting below the gum line.
The cattle futures should have sent her to jail thirty years ago. If not the cattle futures, then the Rose Law documents. If not the Rose Law documents, then the Clinton Global Initiative pay-for-play.
If it was just a question of Trump or not-Trump the decision would be a lot easier. Trump is something of a carnival barker (though no fool), but I don't want to be normalizing corruption by voting for Clinton.
I'm curious to see whether he ends up with more customers, and their demographics. My male friends would be perfectly happy drinking in a place without cell phones, but the women I know (mostly middle aged MC-UMC) would go into shock if you kept them from Facebook for any length of time.
It's not illegal in the US. But you would be taking the chance of getting sued when a customer had a medical emergency and nobody could call emergency services. You could just keep an old-fashioned phone behind the bar for emergencies, assuming you were willing to deal with customers constantly begging to use it.
Instead of going to the toilet they'll step out the back door and make the call from behind a dumpster. This is a pub we're talking about, not the Mall of America.
The plant's not going to build itself, which means thousands of people kicking up dust over those six months, and even after it's complete there will need to be people there to maintain it.
A sample size of seven is too small to draw any conclusions. The radiation hypothesis makes sense, though.
I'm seeing more and more people using Apple desktops and laptops for all sorts of software development. Developing anything but windows-only software on a Windows system is just painful, and Linux desktops still have a dearth of everyday business-necessary applications (like Office). The Mac gives you the best of both worlds.
Except that they're not actually funneling it to Ireland. These are profits subsidiaries made in Europe that were never moved to the US. As I noted in another comment, there are multinationals that play games with IP and offset pricing schemes to move money into non-US markets, but to all indications Apple isn't one of them. Cook has been pretty clear about that over the years, deriding what other companies are doing as "accounting games".
That's true but misleading. In a competitive market "what the market will bear" is in part a function of what it costs producers to produce the item.
The idea Apple doesn't pay enough US taxes to cover any possible use of US infrastructure beggars belief - the company paid over eight billion in 2014 alone. Apple pays US taxes on all US sales - what Stiglitz is saying is somehow Apple should pay US taxes on profits from European sales.
When a device is made in China and shipped to and sold in Germany, what US infrastructure is Apple using that needs to be supported with additional billions of dollars every year? Yes, there are some companies that do shady things like sell IP to subsidiaries and then pay huge fees to use their own IP, shifting US profits to the subsidiaries. But Apple is in a small subset of US corporations that doesn't play those kinds of accounting games.
Were I Tim Cook I'd move Apple to Ireland just to hear idiots like Stiglitz try to explain why Apple should still pay US taxes on every penny it makes everywhere.
49% rapist? That's difficult to believe. I never saw anything that suggests he's in any way a rapist.
Yes. For this reason I'm much more skeptical of allegations than I would if the same thing happened in a project for some random web framework.
People on both sides of gamergate say the same thing but mean something totally different.
Typically later actions are enough to prove intent. You're really bending over backward to give her the benefit of the doubt, and I understand that. But if it were you or I this is extra jail time.
Yes, in fact I do.
Yes, that's tampering with evidence. Try pulling this kind of nonsense if you're involved with a subpoena and see what happens. Prosecutors and judges will not accept "You can't prove what I deleted has any connection to the case" as a valid defense.
I used to be good friends with a theater owner. He told me he actually loses money on the tickets - all of it and more went to the movie distributer. The food was expensive because that's where some of his expenses and all his profit came from.
Yes, and this falls within that meaning because the point was to evade official records statutes and control evidence of other wrongdoing.
Lost? You mean, "lost" as in misplaced, or "lost" as in deliberately deleted? That's not a typical usage of the word "lost". And yes, we know it happened after the subpoena because Hillary's lawyers have admitted the process they used to comply with the subpoena. And this is kind of joke all on its own: They searched all the email for a handful of keywords and deleted the everything else. So they searched for "Libya" but not, say, "Lib", which would be a common abbreviation, along with probably "L". No judge would have tolerated that from a normal person.
Tampering with evidence carries a maximum sentence of twenty years. On top of that we have criminal contempt of court and destruction of federal records.
If you or I got a subpoena to produce emails from an illegal email system, then we produced a tiny fraction of the emails and deleted the rest, the judge would be shaking his head and muttering "the balls on this guy" as he threw us in jail for decades.
Inciting? That's an odd spin - they can't break in and steal those emails now because she deleted them. All he's saying is he wants them to release emails they already have. Which, you know, don't actually exist according to Clinton.
This is a great move, because there's no way Clinton can hid the fact she broke the law, then broke the law again when she deleted emails she was legally obligated to produce. There's a reason Trump is ahead in the latest polls.
Nobody who goes to an office in Langley is undercover. Just stop.
Whenever you spend money somebody benefits, and ultimately taxes get paid. That's hardly a point in their favor.
What is it with Grandma and email?