The only protection that Full Disk Encryption gives is if someone physically gets their hands on the machine that they can not boot the machine and read its contents. This make perfect sense for laptops but makes little sense for any pertinently fixed location workstations.
There's no such thing as a permanently fixed workstation -- sooner or later it, or the hard drive in it, will be thrown out. There've been enough stories about people who've bought second-hand drives and being able to get data off them, either by just installing them on a computer, or by running disk recovery software.
If you think your company might some day replace you with some numb-nuts who doesn't know about Derek's Boot-and-Nuke, it makes sense to require encryption even on desktops.
Among the people who claim this is Steve Gibson who does the Security Now podcast with Leo Laporte. When he benchmarked TrueCrypt, he found that not only was the overhead as low as claimed, but that Windows Defrag ran faster.
I run TrueCrypt on a machine that I use for audio editing, and I've seen no performance dip since installing it -- the boot time remains between 60-90 seconds, even with the password screen.
Somoene's going to come in here and say that the problem isn't the topic, it's that the articles are either original research, aren't verifiable, or aren't "notable"
A couple weeks back, someone went through and deleted all the cultural references for Venture Bros. episodes on the grounds that they were all original research and didn't include any quotes from the creators showing that the references were intentional. The deleted references included things like explaining that when a character says, "Like Patty Smyth before me, I am a warrior," he's referencing the hit song "The Warrior" by the band Scandal, of which Patty Smyth was the lead singer. When this was pointed out to him, he said that the episode wasn't a valid source.
Someone needs to create a new Wikipedia that's more Hitch-hiker's Guide to the Galaxy than Encyclopedia Galactica.
Since they're both created by people who were involved with MST3K from almost the beginning, I don't see how either can be rip-offs -- it's like saying Rick Wakeman's albums are ripoffs of Yes, but Jon Anderson's aren't.
Other types of puzzles have their names pluralized in English, though -- crosswords, word searches, acrostics. Why should sodoku be treated differently, other than that's the way it's done in Japan?
"Cul de sacs" doesn't make any more sense than "sodokus" -- "cul de sac" means "bottom of the sack" (which is why Bilbo and Frodo Baggins lived on Bag End) and culs de sac is the proper French plural. But everybody says "cul de sacs" because we aren't French.
Not just MP3s, but 128 kbps MP3s. I know the guy means well, but there are plenty of other audiophiles doing the same thing, but they're ripping at 320 or using FLAC and putting the results on bit torrent.
What if they slowly transform their services into kludgy messes, as has already happen to their Usenet archive? Relying on a single company because you believe they'll never screw up is a recipe for disaster.
You can blindly state that the President can Order the Executive Branch - but you think very little about the exceptions - there are limits to Executive power.
The exceptions are irrelevant to the discussion -- there is no law against the US military/intelligence agencies assassinating enemy leaders, just an Executive Order. If the President rescinds that order, there is no legal reason why the CIA couldn't assassinate Osama bin Laden, which is what sparked this subthread.
We live in a Democratic Republic - not "W's" Kingdom.
What are you blabbering about? The examples discussed in this subthread have been (A) Ford and Reagan forbidding the CIA from assassinating foreign leaders, (B) FDR ordering the detention of the Nisei, (C) Lincoln freeing the slaves, and(D) Truman attempting to take over steel plants. We've also talked about whether Bush could authorize the assassination of foreign leaders, which he clearly can do but hasn't. The only one of these examples relevant to Bush is something that he hasn't done. Ranting about "W's Kingdom" just makes you look like a crackpot.
Yes, Some People question the Constitutionality of Executive Orders. Some People question the Constitutionality of the income tax, even though that's expressly authorized through an amendment. Some People will question anything, with or without justification. I note that the Wikipedia article doesn't provide any sources for these criticisms, just a weasel-worded, "Critics claim."
The Constitution says the President is in charge of the Executive Branch. That gives him the power to issue orders to the branch -- QED, Executive Orders are legal.
Reparations to the Nissei were issued by Congress, which decided to second guess Roosevelt, and not by a court ruling that the concentration camps had been illegal.
Where in the Constitution does it say that the President has the right to issue Executive Orders?
As head of the Executive Branch, he has the power to issue directives on how the agencies under his control operate -- that's what an Executive Order is. EOs 11905 and 12333 were primarily concerned with the organization of US intelligence agencies, but Ford and Reagan decided to also exercise their powers to forbid those agencies from killing foreign leaders despite the fact that Congress had passed no laws to that effect.
Some Presidents have tried to use EOs to step beyond their powers, such as when Truman tried to put steel mills under Federal control, but in principle they're entirely constitutional.
Better still, when did Presidents start issuing Executive Orders?
1789 according to Wikipedia. The State Department began numbering them c.1900, and retroactively numbered those issued since Lincoln, with the Emancipation Proclamation as EO 1.
Yes, as the wal-mart puts other businesses out of business, those people who used to own a hardware shop now work in the hardware section.
Which sucks for the entrepreneurs, but since local businesses don't pay employees as much as Big Box Stores, its better for individual workers who don't own their own business.
Yes because low price is king! Your community is 2nd! Dollar dollar bill ya'll... People not even willing to make one small change in their habits make me sick.
Saying that people should change isn't going to get you anywhere unless they see value in changing -- and something as nebulous as "community" isn't it. What is the value of shopping at a mom-and-pop bookstore over Amazon? Certainly not price. Or selection. Sure, I'll get the book faster, but I never need a particular book right this instant, so it doesn't over-ride the fact that mom-and-pop bookstores suck. If that makes you sick, too bad.
Assassination is forbidden by Executive Order, not an actual law. The President can rescind Executive Orders with the stroke of a pen without consulting Congress.
The size of the board isn't really the issue. As Conway showed with his Game of Life (which he first experimented with using a Go board) simple rules can give rise to complexity. Even on an 8x8 one, there would be 64 possible first moves for Go compared to 20 in chess. With chess the number of possible moves increases throughout the first part of the game, while in Go it decreases by one per turn (sometimes more if a move creates an intersection with no liberties; sometimes the number increases if a number of stones gets captured). Plus in chess, the bad moves are often quite obvious, while errors in Go take some skill to spot.
Firefox and IE will, by default, warn you about sending unencrypted passwords.
Firefox will continue to warn you until you check the "Do not warn me in the future" box. Which for most people is after the first time, but it's still the user's choice to disable the notification.
A) The Templars were a military-religious organization, not an ethnic or racial group, and as such destroying them wasn't genocide any more than destroying the Ku Klux Klan or Skull and Bones society would be.
B) The pogrom was localized in France, and the Pope only went along with it reluctantly, mostly because King Philip threatened war if he didn't. Templars in other parts of Europe escaped alive, and were even allowed to join rival organizations.
Only a portion of New England was settled by religious fanatics -- the bulk of England's American colonies were settled by volunteers and debtors, and westward expansion was powered in large part by the Irish and Scandawoogians.
You're assuming that (A) everyone cares about this enough for it to be a defining factor in our voting decisions over other issues like FISA, TSA regulations, immigration, Supreme Court confirmations, etc, and (B) the other guy wouldn't be just as much in the pocket of the RIAA.
Sure, the government has the right to inspect anything entering the country -- but the idea of confiscating a computer without evidence that it contains anything illegal, and holding it indefinitely goes far beyond that.
Slashdot Mirror
There's no such thing as a permanently fixed workstation -- sooner or later it, or the hard drive in it, will be thrown out. There've been enough stories about people who've bought second-hand drives and being able to get data off them, either by just installing them on a computer, or by running disk recovery software.
If you think your company might some day replace you with some numb-nuts who doesn't know about Derek's Boot-and-Nuke, it makes sense to require encryption even on desktops.
You pop in the boot/recovery CD the encryption app forced you to create before it'd encrypt the drive? At least that's how it works on TrueCrypt.
Among the people who claim this is Steve Gibson who does the Security Now podcast with Leo Laporte. When he benchmarked TrueCrypt, he found that not only was the overhead as low as claimed, but that Windows Defrag ran faster.
I run TrueCrypt on a machine that I use for audio editing, and I've seen no performance dip since installing it -- the boot time remains between 60-90 seconds, even with the password screen.
A couple weeks back, someone went through and deleted all the cultural references for Venture Bros. episodes on the grounds that they were all original research and didn't include any quotes from the creators showing that the references were intentional. The deleted references included things like explaining that when a character says, "Like Patty Smyth before me, I am a warrior," he's referencing the hit song "The Warrior" by the band Scandal, of which Patty Smyth was the lead singer. When this was pointed out to him, he said that the episode wasn't a valid source.
Someone needs to create a new Wikipedia that's more Hitch-hiker's Guide to the Galaxy than Encyclopedia Galactica.
You measure a Kessel with a vessel, but you fly it with a crew that is true.
Since they're both created by people who were involved with MST3K from almost the beginning, I don't see how either can be rip-offs -- it's like saying Rick Wakeman's albums are ripoffs of Yes, but Jon Anderson's aren't.
Other types of puzzles have their names pluralized in English, though -- crosswords, word searches, acrostics. Why should sodoku be treated differently, other than that's the way it's done in Japan?
"Cul de sacs" doesn't make any more sense than "sodokus" -- "cul de sac" means "bottom of the sack" (which is why Bilbo and Frodo Baggins lived on Bag End) and culs de sac is the proper French plural. But everybody says "cul de sacs" because we aren't French.
They have a really good one by Eugen Sandow discussing the death of Colonel Lloyd Venture.
I have tons of MP3s that were ripped from vinyl, and they don't have any hiss. They do have an occasional pop, but that's it -- they sound great.
Not just MP3s, but 128 kbps MP3s. I know the guy means well, but there are plenty of other audiophiles doing the same thing, but they're ripping at 320 or using FLAC and putting the results on bit torrent.
Hmm, could it be that there are so many of these stories because Google is invading our privacy?
What if they slowly transform their services into kludgy messes, as has already happen to their Usenet archive? Relying on a single company because you believe they'll never screw up is a recipe for disaster.
The exceptions are irrelevant to the discussion -- there is no law against the US military/intelligence agencies assassinating enemy leaders, just an Executive Order. If the President rescinds that order, there is no legal reason why the CIA couldn't assassinate Osama bin Laden, which is what sparked this subthread.
What are you blabbering about? The examples discussed in this subthread have been (A) Ford and Reagan forbidding the CIA from assassinating foreign leaders, (B) FDR ordering the detention of the Nisei, (C) Lincoln freeing the slaves, and(D) Truman attempting to take over steel plants. We've also talked about whether Bush could authorize the assassination of foreign leaders, which he clearly can do but hasn't. The only one of these examples relevant to Bush is something that he hasn't done. Ranting about "W's Kingdom" just makes you look like a crackpot.
Yes, Some People question the Constitutionality of Executive Orders. Some People question the Constitutionality of the income tax, even though that's expressly authorized through an amendment. Some People will question anything, with or without justification. I note that the Wikipedia article doesn't provide any sources for these criticisms, just a weasel-worded, "Critics claim."
The Constitution says the President is in charge of the Executive Branch. That gives him the power to issue orders to the branch -- QED, Executive Orders are legal.
Reparations to the Nissei were issued by Congress, which decided to second guess Roosevelt, and not by a court ruling that the concentration camps had been illegal.
As head of the Executive Branch, he has the power to issue directives on how the agencies under his control operate -- that's what an Executive Order is. EOs 11905 and 12333 were primarily concerned with the organization of US intelligence agencies, but Ford and Reagan decided to also exercise their powers to forbid those agencies from killing foreign leaders despite the fact that Congress had passed no laws to that effect.
Some Presidents have tried to use EOs to step beyond their powers, such as when Truman tried to put steel mills under Federal control, but in principle they're entirely constitutional.
1789 according to Wikipedia. The State Department began numbering them c.1900, and retroactively numbered those issued since Lincoln, with the Emancipation Proclamation as EO 1.
Which sucks for the entrepreneurs, but since local businesses don't pay employees as much as Big Box Stores, its better for individual workers who don't own their own business.
Saying that people should change isn't going to get you anywhere unless they see value in changing -- and something as nebulous as "community" isn't it. What is the value of shopping at a mom-and-pop bookstore over Amazon? Certainly not price. Or selection. Sure, I'll get the book faster, but I never need a particular book right this instant, so it doesn't over-ride the fact that mom-and-pop bookstores suck. If that makes you sick, too bad.
Assassination is forbidden by Executive Order, not an actual law. The President can rescind Executive Orders with the stroke of a pen without consulting Congress.
The size of the board isn't really the issue. As Conway showed with his Game of Life (which he first experimented with using a Go board) simple rules can give rise to complexity. Even on an 8x8 one, there would be 64 possible first moves for Go compared to 20 in chess. With chess the number of possible moves increases throughout the first part of the game, while in Go it decreases by one per turn (sometimes more if a move creates an intersection with no liberties; sometimes the number increases if a number of stones gets captured). Plus in chess, the bad moves are often quite obvious, while errors in Go take some skill to spot.
Firefox will continue to warn you until you check the "Do not warn me in the future" box. Which for most people is after the first time, but it's still the user's choice to disable the notification.
A) The Templars were a military-religious organization, not an ethnic or racial group, and as such destroying them wasn't genocide any more than destroying the Ku Klux Klan or Skull and Bones society would be.
B) The pogrom was localized in France, and the Pope only went along with it reluctantly, mostly because King Philip threatened war if he didn't. Templars in other parts of Europe escaped alive, and were even allowed to join rival organizations.
Only a portion of New England was settled by religious fanatics -- the bulk of England's American colonies were settled by volunteers and debtors, and westward expansion was powered in large part by the Irish and Scandawoogians.
You're assuming that (A) everyone cares about this enough for it to be a defining factor in our voting decisions over other issues like FISA, TSA regulations, immigration, Supreme Court confirmations, etc, and (B) the other guy wouldn't be just as much in the pocket of the RIAA.
Sure, the government has the right to inspect anything entering the country -- but the idea of confiscating a computer without evidence that it contains anything illegal, and holding it indefinitely goes far beyond that.