The problem with most privacy laws is that they are a giant gray area based on an individuals reasonable expectations.
Your thought process may indeed be correct for your organization, I'm obviously not in a position to pass judgment as every company is different.
I like to make my users comfortable so that they come to me with issues before they become catastrophic problems. In my experience when they don't see you as adversarial they cooperate to a much greater extent and even become curious about how to make things easier on themselves. This gives me the added bonus of face time with the cute girls in marketing.
Just to clarify I wasn't saying you were doing anything wrong either way, just that it's a legal minefield that most companies don't take enough time to properly handle.
My company has us going to places like Palm Beach Florida during spring break for three weeks while I have my birthday down there. It's kind of inevitable when you are spending 18 hours a day with the people you work with. Event life has it's ups and downs no pun intended.
haha, I'll freely admit I'm an idiot in that department but I'm so far always able to tell when a woman is being less than honest with me. This particular one was exceptionally good at it.
In my situation I know a lot of her friends and they always talk so I'd overhear what she was actually doing. Sometimes even worse a few months later she would be telling a story which directly conflicts with the story I knew was bogus!
In the end I know people can trust me so I'm inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt since they know they can trust me. Both my work and personal philosophy will make me go through the same crap over and over until I find a situation or person that works out.
Course nothing worthwhile is ever easy.
My only problem is that in my experience, every time something is hard to do it's because you're doing it wrong and so that age old quote might just be crap.
Actually this is an invasion of privacy and opens you up to related lawsuits. I'll add that is also makes you responsible if said employee is distributing say kiddie porn.
An automated email filter is one thing, a human looking through email accounts is entirely different in the legal system. You need a rock solid policy in place that the user acknowledges BEFORE being granted rights. I've run into this issue without our lawyers as we codify company policy. The company was a mom and pop shop only three years ago, now it's going corporate and with it all the bureaucracy which comes with covering your ass.
If you have specific evidence that an employee is misbehaving then you can audit their email otherwise it's better to stay out and avoid the legal minefield.
In my experience if an employee is looking for a job they are using a different email account anyways. Even if they use your email system their performance is likely lacking anyways. Message tracking is usually more than sufficient for these types of searches and doesn't involve you looking through all their content.
There are exceptions to these policies but it is a legal minefield most companies aren't willing to risk having to navigate. Unless you're a fortune 500 you really gain very little by reading email directly.
Well said, and this has always been my personal philosophy as a syadmin. If you can't trust me with your data you can't trust anybody. It's that simple. The only time I'll go into another account is to backup files in which case I'm not reading the content.
There is one more instance when I'll go into an account, when there is a legitimate need for specific content and the account owner isn't available to provide it to the employee. Again, I don't go looking at other stuff, I have something specific I'm searching for.
I've always taken my position pretty seriously, I can't believe that number is that high. Every sysadmin I know is either too busy to snoop or doesn't care enough to snoop. I can admit I was once tempted to snoop because I was dating a coworker but my damned personal ethics got in the way and I decided to trust her instead. Yeah it turns out she was lying through her teeth but there are other ways to tell if someone is lying that are far better than snooping through email which may or may not be out of context.
Violate the law that they are sworn to protect perhaps?
The constitution is supposed to protect people from government abuse but right now it is getting trampled and shown very little respect.
Personally I think it's a sad day when we have to give up our high ground because our enemy is so strong that our principles will prevent us from winning the day.
I find it strange how we act like that's the case even though the "enemy" is extraordinarily weak.
Just because they do it, is not a reason for us to do it.
You rely on child exploitation laws which are already in place perhaps? If a child is harmed there are plenty of laws in the way to make sure there is a measure of justice.
This pretty much equates to outlawing the symptoms of a problem such as the tremors of an alcoholic in need of smooth refreshing goodness.
In that context the video is simply evidence against the person who actually harmed a child. That sounds like appropriate punishment to me.
I don't think that will happen though and I actually agree with the current law, at some point I think certain kinds of content serve no use to society, such as malware and kiddie porn but I can understand that information should always be legal. I think in this context we could argue that it is not information and is simply objectionable content.
When something is no good for anyone I think it's safe to say that it should be illegal. If someone comes along that can prove it does some good then the issue needs to be readdressed and evaluated for legitimacy.
Might have achieved our stated goal of capturing Osama Bin Laden so that he may see justice for the crimes he perpetrated.
It is sad how Afghanistan was used as a wedge to get us into Iraq and probably nothing more. History will tell the full tail but I don't see how anything positive will come out of it currently.
You are using a different definition of reinstall. Your story is not unlike mine, I too started with Gentoo when it was all stage 1 installs. The issue is that this DRM requires reactivation if certain parts of the OS are replaced. This is quite common in Linux. The whole entire thing gets replaced once a year at least if you keep up with patches. It's quite easy to do but the game will see different checksums and require you to reactivate.
Given that billions of tax payer dollars have been used to subsidize broadband in rural areas it would be good to see that our money is being put to good use rather than squandered like we all suspect that it was. I might add that people have been locked up without seeing a lawyer although I'm unsure about the kittens being murdered.
It doesn't look like you understand the issue with hardware independent imaging. You have drivers which conflict with one another based on firmware updates or any number of instances. I use nlite for making custom XP installations, I maintain an image for each type of computer because of this however. I don't use disks those, it's all PXE boot.
With BartPE you can dynamically choose what needs to be loaded before you enter your Windows install so you get a whole different level of flexibility which can thankfully be automated by on model information.
Out of curiosity how is OS X group policy supported? I didn't think it was nearly as far along as group policy in XP SP3 or Vista.
I know SUSE/Novell has Zenworks for Group policy across Linux and Windows but it doesn't support OS X. SUN has a similarly functional product although I've no experience with it. Oracle also has an offering but of course all three are just as expensive as the Windows options.
I do have a department of Macs though so it would be nice to reduce my admin overhead on them as right now they take the majority of my support time. Apple seems to have mangled Samba good and proper on OS X. I don't have any problems connecting to shares on any Linux distro around but OS X likes to disconnect randomly. It also leaves a trail of hidden files all over the network. Last time I did a purge I removed over 600gigs of hidden files containing the thumbnails I assume for all the photos they work with. Samba also never closes a connection to the file so routinely I have to manually kill file locks for the Mac users to allow others access.
Linux would be a good choice for such machines like my own but the average user gains very little from having to learn a whole different platform. Vista despite what a lot of people claim does not require retraining for 99% of average day tasks.
I'm afraid that my backend will be changed to Linux far sooner than the desktop end.
I don't care about virus resistance of Linux, my Windows environment doesn't have a problem with it despite seeing millions of emails a month it is configured correctly. The only virus the company has seen in 4 years was ironically yesterday when one of the Administrators blindly installed an ActiveX component for some reason. He was also running as local admin despite the dangers it poses. Why he was using IE as well I've no idea but there was certainly too much trust in his abilities which are sharply declining.
I would say the blind hatred of Vista that you express is far more foolish as I already gave several explicit reasons why upgrading to Vista would be advantageous and so it is obviously not a blind upgrade. Furthermore I also said I don't upgrade, I buy new, when I buy new it has the latest. My group policy ensures that all the right programs get installed and configured correctly and that the user gets a consistent experience. These tools just aren't there yet without going with SUSE and expensive Novell apps to manage it all. SUN has a comparable offering as well again costing a lot and then there is the lack of experience for the majority of support people out there.
Additionally, on new harder Vista is not slower than XP on the older hardware, it has been tested with all the applications deployed in my environment, DRM is completely and absurdly irrelevant since we're not playing DRM content at work are we? No, we produce video and I might add we distribute it without DRM.
The security problems it has I've not run into as I don't run as local admin nor do my users, you just seem to spout all the common bs about Vista that people spread everytime there is a new release.
Finally since you resorted to name calling I'll assume that you aren't responsible for purchasing machines for your company as you seem to think Vista is more expensive when our machines cost less today than they did 4 years ago. Of course we lease machines for 3 years, hard wipe them and get them refreshed so we never pay the full cost of the hardware/software and we always have warranty support.
My laptop already runs Ubuntu but thanks for trolling. No it doesn't perform faster because I have to run a VM with Windows in it and you're making bad assumptions that my laptop ran Vista to begin with. This speed increase you mention simply doesn't exist when you already have a performance template in place for Windows. This is especially true given the retraining required to switch to Linux. The average user gains very little in terms of productivity from the me too applications on most distros.
I'm afraid the pain in the ass that is getting Ubuntu installed on the majority of brand new hardware is simply not worth the effort on the desktop side. On the server side sure, but the desktop side it's pointless as all I do is plug in a new machine to the network and join it to the domain. Automation takes care of the rest.
Yes it is possible with BartPE but it is quite difficult when compared to how simple it is with Vista installations. BartPE would load the correct boot drivers which is what I was referring to.
While all your points are technically accurate about Vista they are not unique to Vista or caused by Vista.
Single images are the very reason Vista is attractive to businesses because it's a hardware independent image based installation. XP required custom boot drivers for each platform.
I don't upgrade the OS on any machine, as the warranty expires I go with what's available and well supported. My new laptops run Vista at acceptable speeds with no noticeable lag. The eye candy is of course turned off as a matter of group policy, same with UAC as my users don't run as admin to begin with.
The fact that practically every aspect of the user experience can be controlled through group policy also makes Vista very attractive to businesses. Add in the custom performance metrics for your applications to monitor their crashing centrally and you have something that makes sense for large organizations.
I know I am fortunate in that my apps are standards based web applications so I can use them on whatever platform I choose. This meant that when we started buying Macs for the graphics department because the art director was more comfortable with them, that they were able to contribute without needing a virtual machine.
I've never seen companies skip Windows releases unless they are in financial trouble and not growing. Otherwise new computers purchased would usually come with the latest version of Windows. I've never experienced a company skipping releases but that does mean admittedly little given that I am just one person. I can certainly understand why companies would do that if they aren't growing.
Which support nightmares are that? Vista accidentally came on about 30 laptops I ordered. I converted 10 of them to XP but left the rest and no one has complained at all. Of course our internal apps are all web-based and work just fine with Firefox so that has a lot to do with it.
The only issue I ran into was with the 64bit version of Vista but I have the same issue with 64bit XP in that the Sonicwall VPN client wasn't supported. There is now a functional beta for it and all is well.
It's not even that slow in our environment so I'm wondering why business users would be so afraid of it.
Home users I think would have the hardest time with it because its more geared towards business users. UAC is trivially easy to disable but it shouldn't be popping up on day to day activities.
Windows 7 will be based on Vista so I wouldn't expect it to be a whole lot different.
I'm comfortable and happy with XP although my work laptop is being converted to Ubuntu with VMWare for the Windows only stuff. The biggest problem I run into is the lack of enterprise level security for Linux. For instance I use currently a fingerprint scanner to turn on the laptop and decrypt the drive. Truecrypt works great for an individual laptop but I don't see a way at least to deploy it company wide. HP Embedded security on the other hand is trivially easy to deploy. I keep three USB thumb-drives with the restore keys, one goes in the safe, the other stays locked in my drawer, and the third is off-site. I rotate when I install a new batch of machines.
Are you serious? No, you can't be, either that or you've missed the entire point of the supreme court. Judges are there specifically to decide how a law should be enforced or even if it should be enforced at all.
I also think the majority of people have missed the point, a suitcase nuke is certainly a possibility but I wouldn't call it a treat. Look how much happened in reaction to 9/11? Imagine what would happen if someone detonated a nuke device of any size?
Nukes only work as a weapon when they can be deployed to wipe out your enemy or when the other side doesn't have nukes. If nukes are used against Americans you can believe that nukes will be used in retaliation and the resulting damage will be far more destructive than any suitcase bomb or even seven suitcase bombs in seven different cities.
I'll refer again to the reaction of 9/11, there was a lot of talk about whether or not to use small nuclear ordinance which we already have in our stockpile.
So yes, the thought of someone detonating a bomb in any city is scary and I think European targets would more than likely hit first which would result in a whole new level of cooperation as nuclear bombs scare everyone pretty universally.
You are correct that is not impossible though even though I consider it outside the realm of likely which makes it effectively impossible.
yes, you realize changing the MAC address on most cable or DSL modems is quite difficult given that the modem loses it's authorization from the ISP. How do you think they provision your access to begin with? The MAC of your computer is irrelevant as MAC addresses don't go past the first hop router which is your cable or DSL modem.
Encrypting traffic only works if only trusted people copy, most P2P applications are only effective if they have millions of users, there is no way to logistically make sure you can trust that many users.
Really? Cause we can project an apple falling and thus it is not actually falling so it is not a fact that it is falling, but a flaw in your observation.
What you attribute to facts are actually observations and can be proven wrong just like anything else in science.
When you call something a fact then it can't be questioned, the scientific method doesn't allow for such a dead-end. Or at the very least, it shouldn't as it closes the mind.
Theories are supported by observations, there have been plenty of theories that have not stood up to scrutiny because observations were either falsified or incorrect. This is of course why results should be independently verified. If another person observes similar behavior then your theory holds water and is up for further testing either to clarify vagueness or to use it as an assumption in a new hypothesis.
I tell ya, that's so true, I grew up in Vermont with a front wear drive Neon and I never got stuck anywhere.
I remember doing donuts on the highway in a blizzard that the plows gave up on. I had the whole road to myself so why not? I do remember the stress involved in having to stop on a hill though, something I didn't have to worry about for the two weeks I drove a 4x4 truck while my car was getting fixed.
I'd say in most scenarios an SUV is just a bad choice. If you want the seating capacity get a minivan, if you want the towing capacity get a truck. Hell, most minivans can actually tow quite a bit too. They just have a bad reputation which is why everyone went for the SUV.
As long as people research properly cross-checking their results we shouldn't have to worry about facts being true. When facts don't cross-reference properly then we know they are either heavily controversial or just plain wrong. In either case further research is required.
I also don't think the point will ever arise where people don't know any facts, as a day to day network engineer I have a commandset memorized for most tasks that I need to perform, when I run into something I don't know how to do though, Google is my friend and has taught me much over the years.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem with most privacy laws is that they are a giant gray area based on an individuals reasonable expectations.
Your thought process may indeed be correct for your organization, I'm obviously not in a position to pass judgment as every company is different.
I like to make my users comfortable so that they come to me with issues before they become catastrophic problems. In my experience when they don't see you as adversarial they cooperate to a much greater extent and even become curious about how to make things easier on themselves. This gives me the added bonus of face time with the cute girls in marketing.
Just to clarify I wasn't saying you were doing anything wrong either way, just that it's a legal minefield that most companies don't take enough time to properly handle.
My company has us going to places like Palm Beach Florida during spring break for three weeks while I have my birthday down there. It's kind of inevitable when you are spending 18 hours a day with the people you work with. Event life has it's ups and downs no pun intended.
haha, I'll freely admit I'm an idiot in that department but I'm so far always able to tell when a woman is being less than honest with me. This particular one was exceptionally good at it.
In my situation I know a lot of her friends and they always talk so I'd overhear what she was actually doing. Sometimes even worse a few months later she would be telling a story which directly conflicts with the story I knew was bogus!
In the end I know people can trust me so I'm inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt since they know they can trust me. Both my work and personal philosophy will make me go through the same crap over and over until I find a situation or person that works out.
Course nothing worthwhile is ever easy.
My only problem is that in my experience, every time something is hard to do it's because you're doing it wrong and so that age old quote might just be crap.
Actually this is an invasion of privacy and opens you up to related lawsuits. I'll add that is also makes you responsible if said employee is distributing say kiddie porn.
An automated email filter is one thing, a human looking through email accounts is entirely different in the legal system. You need a rock solid policy in place that the user acknowledges BEFORE being granted rights. I've run into this issue without our lawyers as we codify company policy. The company was a mom and pop shop only three years ago, now it's going corporate and with it all the bureaucracy which comes with covering your ass.
If you have specific evidence that an employee is misbehaving then you can audit their email otherwise it's better to stay out and avoid the legal minefield.
In my experience if an employee is looking for a job they are using a different email account anyways. Even if they use your email system their performance is likely lacking anyways. Message tracking is usually more than sufficient for these types of searches and doesn't involve you looking through all their content.
There are exceptions to these policies but it is a legal minefield most companies aren't willing to risk having to navigate. Unless you're a fortune 500 you really gain very little by reading email directly.
Well said, and this has always been my personal philosophy as a syadmin. If you can't trust me with your data you can't trust anybody. It's that simple. The only time I'll go into another account is to backup files in which case I'm not reading the content.
There is one more instance when I'll go into an account, when there is a legitimate need for specific content and the account owner isn't available to provide it to the employee. Again, I don't go looking at other stuff, I have something specific I'm searching for.
I've always taken my position pretty seriously, I can't believe that number is that high. Every sysadmin I know is either too busy to snoop or doesn't care enough to snoop. I can admit I was once tempted to snoop because I was dating a coworker but my damned personal ethics got in the way and I decided to trust her instead. Yeah it turns out she was lying through her teeth but there are other ways to tell if someone is lying that are far better than snooping through email which may or may not be out of context.
Violate the law that they are sworn to protect perhaps?
The constitution is supposed to protect people from government abuse but right now it is getting trampled and shown very little respect.
Personally I think it's a sad day when we have to give up our high ground because our enemy is so strong that our principles will prevent us from winning the day.
I find it strange how we act like that's the case even though the "enemy" is extraordinarily weak.
Just because they do it, is not a reason for us to do it.
You rely on child exploitation laws which are already in place perhaps? If a child is harmed there are plenty of laws in the way to make sure there is a measure of justice.
This pretty much equates to outlawing the symptoms of a problem such as the tremors of an alcoholic in need of smooth refreshing goodness.
In that context the video is simply evidence against the person who actually harmed a child. That sounds like appropriate punishment to me.
I don't think that will happen though and I actually agree with the current law, at some point I think certain kinds of content serve no use to society, such as malware and kiddie porn but I can understand that information should always be legal. I think in this context we could argue that it is not information and is simply objectionable content.
When something is no good for anyone I think it's safe to say that it should be illegal. If someone comes along that can prove it does some good then the issue needs to be readdressed and evaluated for legitimacy.
Might have achieved our stated goal of capturing Osama Bin Laden so that he may see justice for the crimes he perpetrated.
It is sad how Afghanistan was used as a wedge to get us into Iraq and probably nothing more. History will tell the full tail but I don't see how anything positive will come out of it currently.
You are using a different definition of reinstall. Your story is not unlike mine, I too started with Gentoo when it was all stage 1 installs. The issue is that this DRM requires reactivation if certain parts of the OS are replaced. This is quite common in Linux. The whole entire thing gets replaced once a year at least if you keep up with patches. It's quite easy to do but the game will see different checksums and require you to reactivate.
Given that billions of tax payer dollars have been used to subsidize broadband in rural areas it would be good to see that our money is being put to good use rather than squandered like we all suspect that it was. I might add that people have been locked up without seeing a lawyer although I'm unsure about the kittens being murdered.
Thanks for the tip
It doesn't look like you understand the issue with hardware independent imaging. You have drivers which conflict with one another based on firmware updates or any number of instances. I use nlite for making custom XP installations, I maintain an image for each type of computer because of this however. I don't use disks those, it's all PXE boot.
With BartPE you can dynamically choose what needs to be loaded before you enter your Windows install so you get a whole different level of flexibility which can thankfully be automated by on model information.
Out of curiosity how is OS X group policy supported? I didn't think it was nearly as far along as group policy in XP SP3 or Vista.
I know SUSE/Novell has Zenworks for Group policy across Linux and Windows but it doesn't support OS X. SUN has a similarly functional product although I've no experience with it. Oracle also has an offering but of course all three are just as expensive as the Windows options.
I do have a department of Macs though so it would be nice to reduce my admin overhead on them as right now they take the majority of my support time. Apple seems to have mangled Samba good and proper on OS X. I don't have any problems connecting to shares on any Linux distro around but OS X likes to disconnect randomly. It also leaves a trail of hidden files all over the network. Last time I did a purge I removed over 600gigs of hidden files containing the thumbnails I assume for all the photos they work with. Samba also never closes a connection to the file so routinely I have to manually kill file locks for the Mac users to allow others access.
Linux would be a good choice for such machines like my own but the average user gains very little from having to learn a whole different platform. Vista despite what a lot of people claim does not require retraining for 99% of average day tasks.
I'm afraid that my backend will be changed to Linux far sooner than the desktop end.
I don't care about virus resistance of Linux, my Windows environment doesn't have a problem with it despite seeing millions of emails a month it is configured correctly. The only virus the company has seen in 4 years was ironically yesterday when one of the Administrators blindly installed an ActiveX component for some reason. He was also running as local admin despite the dangers it poses. Why he was using IE as well I've no idea but there was certainly too much trust in his abilities which are sharply declining.
I would say the blind hatred of Vista that you express is far more foolish as I already gave several explicit reasons why upgrading to Vista would be advantageous and so it is obviously not a blind upgrade. Furthermore I also said I don't upgrade, I buy new, when I buy new it has the latest. My group policy ensures that all the right programs get installed and configured correctly and that the user gets a consistent experience. These tools just aren't there yet without going with SUSE and expensive Novell apps to manage it all. SUN has a comparable offering as well again costing a lot and then there is the lack of experience for the majority of support people out there.
Additionally, on new harder Vista is not slower than XP on the older hardware, it has been tested with all the applications deployed in my environment, DRM is completely and absurdly irrelevant since we're not playing DRM content at work are we? No, we produce video and I might add we distribute it without DRM.
The security problems it has I've not run into as I don't run as local admin nor do my users, you just seem to spout all the common bs about Vista that people spread everytime there is a new release.
Finally since you resorted to name calling I'll assume that you aren't responsible for purchasing machines for your company as you seem to think Vista is more expensive when our machines cost less today than they did 4 years ago. Of course we lease machines for 3 years, hard wipe them and get them refreshed so we never pay the full cost of the hardware/software and we always have warranty support.
My laptop already runs Ubuntu but thanks for trolling. No it doesn't perform faster because I have to run a VM with Windows in it and you're making bad assumptions that my laptop ran Vista to begin with. This speed increase you mention simply doesn't exist when you already have a performance template in place for Windows. This is especially true given the retraining required to switch to Linux. The average user gains very little in terms of productivity from the me too applications on most distros.
I'm afraid the pain in the ass that is getting Ubuntu installed on the majority of brand new hardware is simply not worth the effort on the desktop side. On the server side sure, but the desktop side it's pointless as all I do is plug in a new machine to the network and join it to the domain. Automation takes care of the rest.
Yes it is possible with BartPE but it is quite difficult when compared to how simple it is with Vista installations. BartPE would load the correct boot drivers which is what I was referring to.
While all your points are technically accurate about Vista they are not unique to Vista or caused by Vista.
Single images are the very reason Vista is attractive to businesses because it's a hardware independent image based installation. XP required custom boot drivers for each platform.
I don't upgrade the OS on any machine, as the warranty expires I go with what's available and well supported. My new laptops run Vista at acceptable speeds with no noticeable lag. The eye candy is of course turned off as a matter of group policy, same with UAC as my users don't run as admin to begin with.
The fact that practically every aspect of the user experience can be controlled through group policy also makes Vista very attractive to businesses. Add in the custom performance metrics for your applications to monitor their crashing centrally and you have something that makes sense for large organizations.
I know I am fortunate in that my apps are standards based web applications so I can use them on whatever platform I choose. This meant that when we started buying Macs for the graphics department because the art director was more comfortable with them, that they were able to contribute without needing a virtual machine.
I've never seen companies skip Windows releases unless they are in financial trouble and not growing. Otherwise new computers purchased would usually come with the latest version of Windows. I've never experienced a company skipping releases but that does mean admittedly little given that I am just one person. I can certainly understand why companies would do that if they aren't growing.
Which support nightmares are that? Vista accidentally came on about 30 laptops I ordered. I converted 10 of them to XP but left the rest and no one has complained at all. Of course our internal apps are all web-based and work just fine with Firefox so that has a lot to do with it.
The only issue I ran into was with the 64bit version of Vista but I have the same issue with 64bit XP in that the Sonicwall VPN client wasn't supported. There is now a functional beta for it and all is well.
It's not even that slow in our environment so I'm wondering why business users would be so afraid of it.
Home users I think would have the hardest time with it because its more geared towards business users. UAC is trivially easy to disable but it shouldn't be popping up on day to day activities.
Windows 7 will be based on Vista so I wouldn't expect it to be a whole lot different.
I'm comfortable and happy with XP although my work laptop is being converted to Ubuntu with VMWare for the Windows only stuff. The biggest problem I run into is the lack of enterprise level security for Linux. For instance I use currently a fingerprint scanner to turn on the laptop and decrypt the drive. Truecrypt works great for an individual laptop but I don't see a way at least to deploy it company wide. HP Embedded security on the other hand is trivially easy to deploy. I keep three USB thumb-drives with the restore keys, one goes in the safe, the other stays locked in my drawer, and the third is off-site. I rotate when I install a new batch of machines.
Are you serious? No, you can't be, either that or you've missed the entire point of the supreme court. Judges are there specifically to decide how a law should be enforced or even if it should be enforced at all.
I also think the majority of people have missed the point, a suitcase nuke is certainly a possibility but I wouldn't call it a treat. Look how much happened in reaction to 9/11? Imagine what would happen if someone detonated a nuke device of any size?
Nukes only work as a weapon when they can be deployed to wipe out your enemy or when the other side doesn't have nukes. If nukes are used against Americans you can believe that nukes will be used in retaliation and the resulting damage will be far more destructive than any suitcase bomb or even seven suitcase bombs in seven different cities.
I'll refer again to the reaction of 9/11, there was a lot of talk about whether or not to use small nuclear ordinance which we already have in our stockpile.
So yes, the thought of someone detonating a bomb in any city is scary and I think European targets would more than likely hit first which would result in a whole new level of cooperation as nuclear bombs scare everyone pretty universally.
You are correct that is not impossible though even though I consider it outside the realm of likely which makes it effectively impossible.
Then they don't know who you are to begin with so the point remains the same.
yes, you realize changing the MAC address on most cable or DSL modems is quite difficult given that the modem loses it's authorization from the ISP. How do you think they provision your access to begin with? The MAC of your computer is irrelevant as MAC addresses don't go past the first hop router which is your cable or DSL modem.
Encrypting traffic only works if only trusted people copy, most P2P applications are only effective if they have millions of users, there is no way to logistically make sure you can trust that many users.
Really? Cause we can project an apple falling and thus it is not actually falling so it is not a fact that it is falling, but a flaw in your observation.
What you attribute to facts are actually observations and can be proven wrong just like anything else in science.
When you call something a fact then it can't be questioned, the scientific method doesn't allow for such a dead-end. Or at the very least, it shouldn't as it closes the mind.
Theories are supported by observations, there have been plenty of theories that have not stood up to scrutiny because observations were either falsified or incorrect. This is of course why results should be independently verified. If another person observes similar behavior then your theory holds water and is up for further testing either to clarify vagueness or to use it as an assumption in a new hypothesis.
I tell ya, that's so true, I grew up in Vermont with a front wear drive Neon and I never got stuck anywhere.
I remember doing donuts on the highway in a blizzard that the plows gave up on. I had the whole road to myself so why not? I do remember the stress involved in having to stop on a hill though, something I didn't have to worry about for the two weeks I drove a 4x4 truck while my car was getting fixed.
I'd say in most scenarios an SUV is just a bad choice. If you want the seating capacity get a minivan, if you want the towing capacity get a truck. Hell, most minivans can actually tow quite a bit too. They just have a bad reputation which is why everyone went for the SUV.
As long as people research properly cross-checking their results we shouldn't have to worry about facts being true. When facts don't cross-reference properly then we know they are either heavily controversial or just plain wrong. In either case further research is required.
I also don't think the point will ever arise where people don't know any facts, as a day to day network engineer I have a commandset memorized for most tasks that I need to perform, when I run into something I don't know how to do though, Google is my friend and has taught me much over the years.
Thank heavens for redundant Internet!