To use an example elsewhere in this comment section, someone went into a Home Depot in another state and bought six $100 gift cards. That should raise a red flag at the store.
No, the NSA recommends that you use a "modern OS" and then gives Windows Vista and Windows 7 as examples. Nothing suggests they consider these the only modern OS's in existence.
Just because something is popular doesn't make it right. There have been all manner of attrocities that were approved of by the majorty of society at the time.
1. Make companies legally liable for data losses that are worsened by the companies own negligence. In the Sony case, they've already admitted the breach occured due to a known vulnerablity that they failed to patch. There's also been some suggestion they were storing CVV2 numbers, which they're expressly told not to do by the credit card providers.
2. Make companies that process obviously fraudulent transcation liable for the losses instead of the card holder. E.g. if someone comes in and starts buying a ton of gift cards with an out of state credit card, and you don't do anything to verify their identity.
They previously announced that no credit card numbers were compromised. Can we get some outside verification on this because they obviously have no issue with lying to us.
iDeal is a third party system. It's run by a corporation called Currence b.v. And it's the same one factor security used by every other system.
Now there is some advantage in that the authentication is done by the bank rather than the retailer, so the information is only in one place, but the bank can still be hacked. It also seems it would be vulnerable to man in the middle attacks.
What we really need is some sort of two factor security. One thing that happened to me recently was a system Verizon used when I had to retrieve my account password from them. They called my on record phone number and provided me a code I had to type into the website to get the password.
What if instead of the CVV2, every transcation had to be confirmed by a one time code provided via a second channel (like the phone).
If turning food directly into energy (e.g. ethanol), isn't working very well, why would food that's had a bunch of the energy stripped out by our digestive tract prove a better idea?
Have the english/liberal arts majors thought this through? They're proposing a situation where the science and engineering majors are where most of the revenue come from and their majors are cost centers. What do you think is going to start happening in the budgetting process?
"Yes, I realize the English building is about to collapse, but the Computer Science Department wants to buy another computer lab, and frankly we can't afford the hit to our revenue stream that would come from delaying that further. I'm afraid you'll just have to hold classes in the general purpose clasrooms for the time being."
Yes, but those things are all handled through law and the attached threat of criminal sanction (for things like unlawful conversion). If something exists only in contract, the only remedy is to sue, which is difficult if the counterparty is already bankrupt.
It's also a reliability issue. If you're making thousands of something, you can have a few not work and no big deal. If you're only making a handful, having one not work is disastrous.
Also, once you launch the thing, there's no way to go fix something if it stops working. So you have to build a device that's capable of running for years with absolutely no maintainence.
That is, by and large, what the US does do. Contrary to general impression, US manufacturing continues to increase (in deed, according to the UN Industrial Development Org, the US accounts for 21% of the planet's manufacturing). In 2006, our country produced more than it ever had before. Since then it's fallen off a bit, but due to the recession, not outsourcing.
Now yes, manufacturing JOBS continue to decrease. But the reality is that it's not because jobs are going overseas; it's because they're disappering entirely. Much like agriculture at one time took a large part of society's labor and then shifted to something that only required a few percent, we are going through a similar shift where a few percent of the population is capable of manufacturing everything.
Space rockets aren't produced in big enough batches to mass produce and generally require a lot of skilled labor. Exactly the sort of product where the US tends to have an advantage.
Consequentilaism is the belief that the morality of an act is based on the results of the act. Deontology is the belief that the morality of an act is based on the nature of the act itself. Virtue ethics is the belief that the morality of an act is based on the nature of the person doing it.
The idea of moral people doing immoral things is really only possible under virtue ethics because the other two don't really recognize a distinction between the moral nature of the actor and the moral nature of the act (although they disagree on how to determine the morality of a particular act).
It's even worse than that. Of the several attempted airline bombings that occured since 9/11, not a single one was stopped because the would be terrorist was caught during pre-flight screening. In every single case, they managed to get the bomb past the TSA and were only foiled due to the intervention of other passengers on the flight.
What Marx meant by it is a strong government *in the hands of the working class* able to realize fast and profound changes in the society.
Making rapid changes to a system as complex as a human society is rarely a good idea. Even gradual change tends to produce unexpected consquences, and making many big changes quickly leads to a situation where the results of the changes becomes completely unpredictable.
It should be noted this reactor went online in 1971, so we're talking about a reactor design that's 40 years out of date. Ineed it's so old that it was scheduled to be decomissioned less than two weeks from now on March 25.
If the sender's e-mail server is charging the penny, how does the recipient's server verify that the penny has actually been collected? If it means only accepting e-mail from servers at known ISP's you're going to break most business e-mail servers. Also, it's essentially just a white list, so why not just implement a white list and forget about the money.
If the recipient's e-mail server is charging the penny, how do you verify who sent the e-mail so you know who to charge? Also, even if you do get rid of spam, you just created a new replacement fraud. The spammers infect a million computers and get them each to send one e-mail to random addresses at the spammer's e-mail server. Viola, the spammer gets to collect $10,000.00 How many people are going to notice their e-mail bill is off by a couple of pennies that month?
This is setting aside that the financial system isn't really prepared to handle billions of one penny transactions every day. You can aggregate, I suppose, but who verifies all the e-mail servers are doing their bookkeeping properly?
Slashdot Mirror
To use an example elsewhere in this comment section, someone went into a Home Depot in another state and bought six $100 gift cards. That should raise a red flag at the store.
No, the NSA recommends that you use a "modern OS" and then gives Windows Vista and Windows 7 as examples. Nothing suggests they consider these the only modern OS's in existence.
Just because something is popular doesn't make it right. There have been all manner of attrocities that were approved of by the majorty of society at the time.
No, it's 10 million out of 77 miilion PSN subscribers, so the chances are 1 in 7
Two big changes that would help:
1. Make companies legally liable for data losses that are worsened by the companies own negligence. In the Sony case, they've already admitted the breach occured due to a known vulnerablity that they failed to patch. There's also been some suggestion they were storing CVV2 numbers, which they're expressly told not to do by the credit card providers.
2. Make companies that process obviously fraudulent transcation liable for the losses instead of the card holder. E.g. if someone comes in and starts buying a ton of gift cards with an out of state credit card, and you don't do anything to verify their identity.
They previously announced that no credit card numbers were compromised. Can we get some outside verification on this because they obviously have no issue with lying to us.
iDeal is a third party system. It's run by a corporation called Currence b.v. And it's the same one factor security used by every other system.
Now there is some advantage in that the authentication is done by the bank rather than the retailer, so the information is only in one place, but the bank can still be hacked. It also seems it would be vulnerable to man in the middle attacks.
What we really need is some sort of two factor security. One thing that happened to me recently was a system Verizon used when I had to retrieve my account password from them. They called my on record phone number and provided me a code I had to type into the website to get the password.
What if instead of the CVV2, every transcation had to be confirmed by a one time code provided via a second channel (like the phone).
Oh please, both parties ride the drug war hobby horse, and both parties love restricting the first ammendment.
If turning food directly into energy (e.g. ethanol), isn't working very well, why would food that's had a bunch of the energy stripped out by our digestive tract prove a better idea?
Have the english/liberal arts majors thought this through? They're proposing a situation where the science and engineering majors are where most of the revenue come from and their majors are cost centers. What do you think is going to start happening in the budgetting process?
"Yes, I realize the English building is about to collapse, but the Computer Science Department wants to buy another computer lab, and frankly we can't afford the hit to our revenue stream that would come from delaying that further. I'm afraid you'll just have to hold classes in the general purpose clasrooms for the time being."
Yes, because people never paint, do theater, write, etc. without having spend tens of thousands of dollars on a four year degree in it first.
Yes, but those things are all handled through law and the attached threat of criminal sanction (for things like unlawful conversion). If something exists only in contract, the only remedy is to sue, which is difficult if the counterparty is already bankrupt.
What good is the contract though? If the provider went under, there's no one left to sue for breaching the contract.
Oh please, 90% of the people who copy things haven't built anything, much less something that could be described as magnificent.
It's also a reliability issue. If you're making thousands of something, you can have a few not work and no big deal. If you're only making a handful, having one not work is disastrous.
Also, once you launch the thing, there's no way to go fix something if it stops working. So you have to build a device that's capable of running for years with absolutely no maintainence.
That is, by and large, what the US does do. Contrary to general impression, US manufacturing continues to increase (in deed, according to the UN Industrial Development Org, the US accounts for 21% of the planet's manufacturing). In 2006, our country produced more than it ever had before. Since then it's fallen off a bit, but due to the recession, not outsourcing.
Now yes, manufacturing JOBS continue to decrease. But the reality is that it's not because jobs are going overseas; it's because they're disappering entirely. Much like agriculture at one time took a large part of society's labor and then shifted to something that only required a few percent, we are going through a similar shift where a few percent of the population is capable of manufacturing everything.
China's big advantage is cheap unskilled labor.
Space rockets aren't produced in big enough batches to mass produce and generally require a lot of skilled labor. Exactly the sort of product where the US tends to have an advantage.
Consequentilaism is the belief that the morality of an act is based on the results of the act.
Deontology is the belief that the morality of an act is based on the nature of the act itself.
Virtue ethics is the belief that the morality of an act is based on the nature of the person doing it.
The idea of moral people doing immoral things is really only possible under virtue ethics because the other two don't really recognize a distinction between the moral nature of the actor and the moral nature of the act (although they disagree on how to determine the morality of a particular act).
It's even worse than that. Of the several attempted airline bombings that occured since 9/11, not a single one was stopped because the would be terrorist was caught during pre-flight screening. In every single case, they managed to get the bomb past the TSA and were only foiled due to the intervention of other passengers on the flight.
I must assume you believe in virtue ethics. For a deontologist, people who do immoral things are by definition immoral people.
Making rapid changes to a system as complex as a human society is rarely a good idea. Even gradual change tends to produce unexpected consquences, and making many big changes quickly leads to a situation where the results of the changes becomes completely unpredictable.
It should be noted this reactor went online in 1971, so we're talking about a reactor design that's 40 years out of date. Ineed it's so old that it was scheduled to be decomissioned less than two weeks from now on March 25.
A banana equivalent dose is .0986 microsieverts, so this is equivalent to 100 bananas, not 30. And that's each hour.
Did you actually read the comment that got him banned? All he said was, “Have you [meaning Bioware] sold your souls to the EA devil?”
The idea that sort of innocous criticism warrants a ban is ridiculous. Heck, on that basis, you outta be banned Slashdot.
Ironically, based on the response, the answer to his question is apparently "Yes."
1 penny where?
If the sender's e-mail server is charging the penny, how does the recipient's server verify that the penny has actually been collected? If it means only accepting e-mail from servers at known ISP's you're going to break most business e-mail servers. Also, it's essentially just a white list, so why not just implement a white list and forget about the money.
If the recipient's e-mail server is charging the penny, how do you verify who sent the e-mail so you know who to charge? Also, even if you do get rid of spam, you just created a new replacement fraud. The spammers infect a million computers and get them each to send one e-mail to random addresses at the spammer's e-mail server. Viola, the spammer gets to collect $10,000.00 How many people are going to notice their e-mail bill is off by a couple of pennies that month?
This is setting aside that the financial system isn't really prepared to handle billions of one penny transactions every day. You can aggregate, I suppose, but who verifies all the e-mail servers are doing their bookkeeping properly?