What gets overlooked, and I'll argue intentionally, is that people are not being held accountable for their actions. This is the flaw I constantly see in discussions regarding "Social Justice". You just attempted to do just that, using a very odd example. Given your example, the secret service would be blamed if the President got shot. And they should be blamed. Numerous people assigned to Presidential detail failed if that was to happen. Bob gets paid to take a bullet for the President, and he hid when trouble started. Jerry neglected email about a shooter, Beth ignored the metal detector because that lady just looked nice, etc.. etc...
Sure, the person who pulled the trigger is a criminal. The other people don't get a free pass at negligence and/or bad decisions because of the crime.
One more example: Say you are in a public park and a big guy sits across from you on a different bench. You start tossing pebbles and they land close to his feet. He gives you a look that lets you know he's not happy, but you continue to toss pebbles. A dozen or so pebbles later he walks over and punches you in the face.
Was he right to punch you in the face? No, he is absolutely guilty of assault. On the other hand, you instigated the encounter and are accountability for your actions. Your broken nose in no way negates the fact that you were instigating the encounter.
You don't have to learn the lesson that you were taught, and the next big guy coming along will still be wrong to punch you in the face. You will still be an instigator deserving of a broken nose.
The fact that there was a crime does not negate or diminish the poor decisions that led up to the crime taking place. Everything is not pure black or pure white. In fact the overwhelming majority of the world is gray. Sure, hold the criminals accountable for their actions. That said you also must hold the actors who presented the opportunity accountable for their actions.
Security people have for decades said "STOP PUTTING EVERYTHING ON THE INTERNET!". And yet we have just about everything including public infrastructure on the Internet. The lies about "why" are very consistent. "Saves money" is probably the most popular, yet who is seeing that savings? Has the cost for you improved, or are the savings are going to execs and bureaucrats? You (Consumer) are the most at risk due to these policy decisions.
A specific class of people saying "do it anyway" does not mean it should be done, it means that people should be better than lemmings. Eventually it will happen, because it will have to happen.
While I certainly feel sorry for anyone who is personally harmed by losing data housed on these systems, I also hope it serves as a wake up call. "Centralized" is not usually the best option.
Blaming the victim, if you claim the Hospital is the victim, is actually appropriate. Blaming the person who's identity may be stolen or trashed was not being done, and those are the real victims here.
TFA tosses blame on those evil men in STEM, states problems are due to sexual harassment in IT, mentions Microsoft hiring models for the game developer conference calling them (MS) "sexist", yet talks up a Chinese chatbot who gives dating advice to those lonely men.
Bias is everywhere, and really not hard to find. Finding the truth somewhere in the middle? That is the challenging task.
As a veteran I can tell you that this is a huge waste of money. Every situation is different, every reaction is different, and every outcome is different. This is yet another attempt to develop the ability to have thought police.
PTSD research should explain and back my assertion.
There is no need to charge a direct service fee for credit card purchases. In the US, businesses and banks hid this long ago so the fees behave much like a tax. Store estimates 200 card transactions/week and the bank charges the business 2.00 per. So the cost of everything gets elevated to cover the 400.00 that is going to the bank.
That it is not called out as a separate line item on the customers bill does not mean that the bank is not making money on every transaction and that _everyone_ is paying additional fees to cover the difference. We are also paying for fraud on those same types of transactions, but they hide those costs too. Marketing people are not stupid, and if people saw these fees and how much fraud they paid to cover they would potentially not use the cards.
I don't care that you use the system because that is your choice. I care that people are dishonest about it. Deceiving people is not a good thing to do morally, which is why it's illegal in many cases.
I read it, I just can't believe someone can be so.. I don't know if the right term should be gullible, idiotic, or handicapped. When all prices are raised by 3-4% so that the banks can claim "you get 2% back", you somehow believe you are getting a deal and it does not cost you money. It does cost you, and it costs EVERYONE else too. Spend a few minutes outside of fantasy land and it's easy to see and even measure. High school level economics should be more than enough to grasp reality.
Reality check. You believe that paying with a credit card does not cost more than cash? You may not see the cost as it may be charged to the store instead of you, but you pay in higher prices for all goods and services. In fact you not only pay higher costs for all goods and services because of a card, you pay for the theft on all of those insured cards.
If the banks did not make money from cards do you think you would get them for free? How do you think they make money on those cards without collecting service fees that you pay for? Those are rhetorical questions, don't continue to prove PT Barnum correct.
The room is not 65' by 65', it's 65 Square feet. Which means 10' x 6'6", or a shade better than an average prison cell. You want to pay $100.00 USD to sit in jail for a night? good grief, no thanks!
The reason for having a nick is not e-peen waving about how many likes you have on Slashdot. It's about being accountable for what you say and giving people the ability to hold rational dialogue with another person. If it was an e-prickle waving contest it would be real names, not nicknames. If there was no desire to hold dialogue there would be no login at all and everyone would be anonymous.
Anonymous has a purpose too, but it used to be advertised as "Anonymous Coward" very intentionally.
You don't want to own up to what you say that's fine, but don't try and belittle people who do.
A fair thing to do would be to lose all public funding and projects as soon as a corporation controls the educational system. If you want to be a private school then you don't get the benefits of public funding through projects. From a quick Google search, it looks like the US Federal Government is pumping a whole lot of cash into this school.
I think you hit on the purpose of this "news". Those people claiming they want to give money, do not actually want the tax system fixed. Short term they look altruistic. Long term, back to not paying and laughing about the stupid peons who can't afford tax attorneys.
Facts and logic, use them! If my argument is wrong demonstrate where I am wrong and provide a better argument. I don't care about feelings, I care about facts and logic (which often run counter feelings). The world you claim to be frightening is the same world that existed when SMTP was first established. The only difference is that people like you demand that security for you is more important than freedom for everyone else.
You don't like SMTP don't use it! Go make your own protocol and have a great time sitting by yourself on your internet island!
HTTPS != HTTP so your opening is simply wrong. Assuming you intended HTTP in your first sentence, you are using flawed logic. The purpose of HTTP is not the same as SMTP, so trying to compare apples and orangutans is pretty damn foolish right? Why is your scooter not as secure as an M1A2SEP93 tank? Oh noes!!
Analogy time, sorry I could not think up a car analogy..
The current public transit systems were designed at a time when everyone on the system was expected to play nice. All over the world these systems are now dangerous, so must need to be redesigned. You left your wallet sitting on the shelf and someone stole it, it must be the system's fault. You were nekked and someone took photo's of you, must be the system's fault. They blackmailed you with the photo's, has to be the system's fault too. You were on speaker phone and gave the operator all your personal information and someone stole your identity, must be the system's fault. You were just sitting there minding your own business and some guy tried to sell you stuff you didn't want, the goddamn public transit system is bad!
Do you see how poor your logic is? You are blaming a PUBLIC TRANSPORT for how it gets used, but that's not the worst part. You also put things on the transport about it being visible and actions that come from that.
Banks and Governments use armored cars with extremely complex schedules to transport things like money and they don't put things on the public bus system. That is an intelligent and intentional decision that perhaps you need to think more about.
I get really tired of this, because it's completely backward and wrong. Email is fine, and it does exactly what it was intended to do. Route messages from source to destination. People like you want email to be something different, but always arbitrary because there is no solution which works to encrypt out of the box which can not be tampered with. You want secure, that's fine but don't make an insecure protocol for mail routing the answer.
Use email for email. Attach encrypted files using what ever format you want, and you have control of the encryption. Stop demanding that generic "email" does it all for you, because if you trust any of the companies listed in TFA to give you bullet proof security, you are a tool.
Those problems have been around since.. well, forever. Ya see, we like to hold this fantasy of Utopia. In fact since we have written things down we see that type of story. Many of us _want_ peace and harmony but forget that human nature means that other people lack that same morality. History is this long chain of events where the higher morals revolt and squash the immoral leaders, and since human nature is to be trusting pretty soon we find ourselves back in the same position again.
So yeah, Povery is a problem. We have had the know-how to fix poverty and starvation for at least a century. There will always be an excuse for war, power grabs, land grabs, punishing those other guys for what they did, etc...
Sure, if this was an office with a mixed crowd trying to accomplish the business charter and meet payroll. I agree with you. This is a Conference, which is informal as hell.
I have to wonder though, who is the sexist being discussed in TFA. Those women who are using their looks to make a ton of money? Unless Microsoft brought in slaves, this is a two way arrangement where someone is making money and someone is spending money.
That basic logic is what gets missed by people attempting to pit the people against each other (though most miss it completely). Women make huge piles of cash modelling, but if a guy appreciates her looks he is bad. Well, if he didn't appreciate the look the model would make money along the scale of male models. Who is getting screwed in that part of the crusade? It's not the guy, that's for damn sure.
How Long has Apple been in business and how is the business setting in terms of Cash? How does that compare to the market, and companies like Zynga, HP, Yahoo, or even Ford, or GM? I could lump in banks too, but I no need. Apple looks to be more stable than the average to anyone with even half a wit.
When the rest of the world knows the FBI and every other US TLA can hack their phones, how many phones do you think Apple will sell overseas?
We know the Microsoft does this natively, yet they sell overseas too. Consumers tend to have short memories, shorter when things are cheap and subsidized.
I think that many of the reasons Tim Cook gives are ones he believes in, but the one I haven't heard yet is: if we do this, our overseas sales are going to tank. People are already sick of the idea of the US government being able to peek into their data/devices. If Apple doesn't take a strong stand here, a foreign competitor will arrive and start taking Apple's mobile market away.
Oh I agree with people being tired of the US spying on them, but I don't see anyone taking any real action. Which to me indicates that the few of us who have vocal concerns are not having any impact on the larger mass of people too busy Facebooking to care about Security.
It's easy to project my beliefs and concerns onto others, but that projection does not mean that those same people share my beliefs and concerns.
Slashdot Mirror
if you read the story or comment on it!
Warning people that actions get them tracked, will get you tracked.
What gets overlooked, and I'll argue intentionally, is that people are not being held accountable for their actions. This is the flaw I constantly see in discussions regarding "Social Justice". You just attempted to do just that, using a very odd example. Given your example, the secret service would be blamed if the President got shot. And they should be blamed. Numerous people assigned to Presidential detail failed if that was to happen. Bob gets paid to take a bullet for the President, and he hid when trouble started. Jerry neglected email about a shooter, Beth ignored the metal detector because that lady just looked nice, etc.. etc...
Sure, the person who pulled the trigger is a criminal. The other people don't get a free pass at negligence and/or bad decisions because of the crime.
One more example: Say you are in a public park and a big guy sits across from you on a different bench. You start tossing pebbles and they land close to his feet. He gives you a look that lets you know he's not happy, but you continue to toss pebbles. A dozen or so pebbles later he walks over and punches you in the face.
Was he right to punch you in the face? No, he is absolutely guilty of assault. On the other hand, you instigated the encounter and are accountability for your actions. Your broken nose in no way negates the fact that you were instigating the encounter.
You don't have to learn the lesson that you were taught, and the next big guy coming along will still be wrong to punch you in the face. You will still be an instigator deserving of a broken nose.
The fact that there was a crime does not negate or diminish the poor decisions that led up to the crime taking place. Everything is not pure black or pure white. In fact the overwhelming majority of the world is gray. Sure, hold the criminals accountable for their actions. That said you also must hold the actors who presented the opportunity accountable for their actions.
Security people have for decades said "STOP PUTTING EVERYTHING ON THE INTERNET!". And yet we have just about everything including public infrastructure on the Internet. The lies about "why" are very consistent. "Saves money" is probably the most popular, yet who is seeing that savings? Has the cost for you improved, or are the savings are going to execs and bureaucrats? You (Consumer) are the most at risk due to these policy decisions.
A specific class of people saying "do it anyway" does not mean it should be done, it means that people should be better than lemmings. Eventually it will happen, because it will have to happen.
While I certainly feel sorry for anyone who is personally harmed by losing data housed on these systems, I also hope it serves as a wake up call. "Centralized" is not usually the best option.
Blaming the victim, if you claim the Hospital is the victim, is actually appropriate. Blaming the person who's identity may be stolen or trashed was not being done, and those are the real victims here.
TFA tosses blame on those evil men in STEM, states problems are due to sexual harassment in IT, mentions Microsoft hiring models for the game developer conference calling them (MS) "sexist", yet talks up a Chinese chatbot who gives dating advice to those lonely men.
Bias is everywhere, and really not hard to find. Finding the truth somewhere in the middle? That is the challenging task.
As a veteran I can tell you that this is a huge waste of money. Every situation is different, every reaction is different, and every outcome is different. This is yet another attempt to develop the ability to have thought police.
PTSD research should explain and back my assertion.
There is no need to charge a direct service fee for credit card purchases. In the US, businesses and banks hid this long ago so the fees behave much like a tax. Store estimates 200 card transactions/week and the bank charges the business 2.00 per. So the cost of everything gets elevated to cover the 400.00 that is going to the bank.
That it is not called out as a separate line item on the customers bill does not mean that the bank is not making money on every transaction and that _everyone_ is paying additional fees to cover the difference. We are also paying for fraud on those same types of transactions, but they hide those costs too. Marketing people are not stupid, and if people saw these fees and how much fraud they paid to cover they would potentially not use the cards.
I don't care that you use the system because that is your choice. I care that people are dishonest about it. Deceiving people is not a good thing to do morally, which is why it's illegal in many cases.
I read it, I just can't believe someone can be so.. I don't know if the right term should be gullible, idiotic, or handicapped. When all prices are raised by 3-4% so that the banks can claim "you get 2% back", you somehow believe you are getting a deal and it does not cost you money. It does cost you, and it costs EVERYONE else too. Spend a few minutes outside of fantasy land and it's easy to see and even measure. High school level economics should be more than enough to grasp reality.
Reality check. You believe that paying with a credit card does not cost more than cash? You may not see the cost as it may be charged to the store instead of you, but you pay in higher prices for all goods and services. In fact you not only pay higher costs for all goods and services because of a card, you pay for the theft on all of those insured cards.
If the banks did not make money from cards do you think you would get them for free? How do you think they make money on those cards without collecting service fees that you pay for? Those are rhetorical questions, don't continue to prove PT Barnum correct.
The room is not 65' by 65', it's 65 Square feet. Which means 10' x 6'6", or a shade better than an average prison cell. You want to pay $100.00 USD to sit in jail for a night? good grief, no thanks!
The reason for having a nick is not e-peen waving about how many likes you have on Slashdot. It's about being accountable for what you say and giving people the ability to hold rational dialogue with another person. If it was an e-prickle waving contest it would be real names, not nicknames. If there was no desire to hold dialogue there would be no login at all and everyone would be anonymous.
Anonymous has a purpose too, but it used to be advertised as "Anonymous Coward" very intentionally.
You don't want to own up to what you say that's fine, but don't try and belittle people who do.
Islam is as peaceful as christianity and judaism.
No, it's not. Instead of repeating what people tell you do some actual homework so that you are not an ignorant fool.
Actually all those religions (and a few more) believe in the same god
No, they don't believe in the same god. Same request about correcting your ignorance, because you really don't seem to be very bright at all.
You are an Idiot!
Ahh, the old "I'm mentally deficient" argument. You have proved my believe in your intellectual capacity..
A fair thing to do would be to lose all public funding and projects as soon as a corporation controls the educational system. If you want to be a private school then you don't get the benefits of public funding through projects. From a quick Google search, it looks like the US Federal Government is pumping a whole lot of cash into this school.
Are you smoking illegal substances? I never mentioned an encrypted protocol, I mentioned email. Take your crack pipe and troll elsewhere
I think you hit on the purpose of this "news". Those people claiming they want to give money, do not actually want the tax system fixed. Short term they look altruistic. Long term, back to not paying and laughing about the stupid peons who can't afford tax attorneys.
Facts and logic, use them! If my argument is wrong demonstrate where I am wrong and provide a better argument. I don't care about feelings, I care about facts and logic (which often run counter feelings). The world you claim to be frightening is the same world that existed when SMTP was first established. The only difference is that people like you demand that security for you is more important than freedom for everyone else.
You don't like SMTP don't use it! Go make your own protocol and have a great time sitting by yourself on your internet island!
HTTPS != HTTP so your opening is simply wrong. Assuming you intended HTTP in your first sentence, you are using flawed logic. The purpose of HTTP is not the same as SMTP, so trying to compare apples and orangutans is pretty damn foolish right? Why is your scooter not as secure as an M1A2SEP93 tank? Oh noes!!
Analogy time, sorry I could not think up a car analogy..
The current public transit systems were designed at a time when everyone on the system was expected to play nice. All over the world these systems are now dangerous, so must need to be redesigned. You left your wallet sitting on the shelf and someone stole it, it must be the system's fault. You were nekked and someone took photo's of you, must be the system's fault. They blackmailed you with the photo's, has to be the system's fault too. You were on speaker phone and gave the operator all your personal information and someone stole your identity, must be the system's fault. You were just sitting there minding your own business and some guy tried to sell you stuff you didn't want, the goddamn public transit system is bad!
Do you see how poor your logic is? You are blaming a PUBLIC TRANSPORT for how it gets used, but that's not the worst part. You also put things on the transport about it being visible and actions that come from that.
Banks and Governments use armored cars with extremely complex schedules to transport things like money and they don't put things on the public bus system. That is an intelligent and intentional decision that perhaps you need to think more about.
I get really tired of this, because it's completely backward and wrong. Email is fine, and it does exactly what it was intended to do. Route messages from source to destination. People like you want email to be something different, but always arbitrary because there is no solution which works to encrypt out of the box which can not be tampered with. You want secure, that's fine but don't make an insecure protocol for mail routing the answer.
Use email for email. Attach encrypted files using what ever format you want, and you have control of the encryption. Stop demanding that generic "email" does it all for you, because if you trust any of the companies listed in TFA to give you bullet proof security, you are a tool.
These pushes are the same thing as H1B pushes. It's a competative race to the bottom.
Those problems have been around since.. well, forever. Ya see, we like to hold this fantasy of Utopia. In fact since we have written things down we see that type of story. Many of us _want_ peace and harmony but forget that human nature means that other people lack that same morality. History is this long chain of events where the higher morals revolt and squash the immoral leaders, and since human nature is to be trusting pretty soon we find ourselves back in the same position again.
So yeah, Povery is a problem. We have had the know-how to fix poverty and starvation for at least a century. There will always be an excuse for war, power grabs, land grabs, punishing those other guys for what they did, etc...
Sure, if this was an office with a mixed crowd trying to accomplish the business charter and meet payroll. I agree with you. This is a Conference, which is informal as hell.
I have to wonder though, who is the sexist being discussed in TFA. Those women who are using their looks to make a ton of money? Unless Microsoft brought in slaves, this is a two way arrangement where someone is making money and someone is spending money.
That basic logic is what gets missed by people attempting to pit the people against each other (though most miss it completely). Women make huge piles of cash modelling, but if a guy appreciates her looks he is bad. Well, if he didn't appreciate the look the model would make money along the scale of male models. Who is getting screwed in that part of the crusade? It's not the guy, that's for damn sure.
A half wit could tell the difference between "Apple" and "Apple Records". Congrats on being below that level...
What stability?
How Long has Apple been in business and how is the business setting in terms of Cash? How does that compare to the market, and companies like Zynga, HP, Yahoo, or even Ford, or GM? I could lump in banks too, but I no need. Apple looks to be more stable than the average to anyone with even half a wit.
When the rest of the world knows the FBI and every other US TLA can hack their phones, how many phones do you think Apple will sell overseas?
We know the Microsoft does this natively, yet they sell overseas too. Consumers tend to have short memories, shorter when things are cheap and subsidized.
I think that many of the reasons Tim Cook gives are ones he believes in, but the one I haven't heard yet is: if we do this, our overseas sales are going to tank. People are already sick of the idea of the US government being able to peek into their data/devices. If Apple doesn't take a strong stand here, a foreign competitor will arrive and start taking Apple's mobile market away.
Oh I agree with people being tired of the US spying on them, but I don't see anyone taking any real action. Which to me indicates that the few of us who have vocal concerns are not having any impact on the larger mass of people too busy Facebooking to care about Security.
It's easy to project my beliefs and concerns onto others, but that projection does not mean that those same people share my beliefs and concerns.