My point was more that Microsoft have tactically acknowledged that their servers are an open book to the TSA, but they think that people and companies will be keen on giving them even more to read.
And to think that just the other day Microsoft were complaining that the NSA fallout was getting worse. Are they hoping to swamp them with simply too much data on Microsoft's servers?
Why isn't this standard procedure for all data repositories?
Doesn't matter how efficient and secure you are, if one person can wipe absolutely everything from one control panel then you have a risk that is not being addressed. And one that isn't even difficult to address.
Mining bitcoins is like mining gold (which is naturally I suppose where the term comes from). You are digging up something that is essentially useless in itself other than it has some rarity. But the big difference is that gold does have some use unrelated to its value as a medium of wealth. If we are going to devote time and energy to "mining" a fabricated and virtual object, could it not at least be something that has some other use or value ?
Constructing meaningless strings of numbers that are nothing except "complicated" seems like a poor use of resources.
"He was getting on a bit. He found new things confusing and increasingly harder to understand. So serves him right that I hacked his computer and stole his credit card numbers. That'll teach him to get old. He had it coming, only himself to blame. Get off the internet, you ancient fossil."
"Despite having learning difficulties, she really liked using the computer they had at the adult literacy classes. So she bought one after saving up her wages from her cleaning job and it really helped with her reading. But I phished her email password off her, and stole her bank details from an email her boss sent her. Some retards need to learn their limitations the hard way. The internet is dangerous and should only be used by smart people like me. Others only have themselves to blame when they get hurt."
To stretch your analogy: It's not your employer who wants the copy. It's another company entirely. Your employer passes on the copy. The other company is happy, because they just got a month's worth of work for nothing. Your employer doesn't much care, at first. Sure, they got what they paid for, but then they start thinking that maybe next month they'll get a copy off some other company for nothing, and not need to pay you anything.
And you; well you're just screwed. Two companies are making money from the fruits of your labour, one without paying you a penny, and the another is planning on laying you off. I guess that serves you right for having an "obsolete business model".
If I was foolish enough to leave my door open then I'd get stuff stolen. That would be bad enough. I wouldn't also expect the authorities to come around and hold me liable for having my stuff stolen.
There are plenty of ways of looking at this problem constructively without resorting to name calling. Address the problem not the person.
You get people who are out of their depth. Whose skill-set is ill-matched to the job's demands. You even get those who are a dead-weight liability. But calling them "idiots", even with the quotes to distance yourself from the word, doesn't accomplish anything and is more counter-productive.
But one thing to consider; if you have an "idiot" on your team, then who is the bigger "idiot" who recruited them?
The point is that some people's machines may have sensitive information on it. Just because you personally can't think of any doesn't mean there are none. Maybe commercial secrets. Maybe juicey blackmail material. Maybe they live in an oppressive regime and are writing a book the government doesn't care for. Or maybe they've just got a sexual orientation that the religious police don't find acceptable, and any evidence of that would be fatal. Withdrawal of things like Truecrypt hurt these people too. It's not all about self-interest.
Do you trust all governments, and all future governments, to never use their backdoor into that for any other purpose, other than the all the good, wholesome things they say they need it for? You know, the holy trinity of "war against terrorism", "national security" and "protecting the children". You really think that "protecting economic interests" never, ever, features? Really?
If you have secret plans that the government should be interested in, then I want them to find out about it - because unless you are planning terrorist activity, there is no reason to fear so much.
I really hope you're not giving us the "if you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to fear" line? Because that one has always been bullshit.
You are totally clueless to what "the government should be interested in", and have even less of an idea on "the government is be interested in".
Neither the headline or OP bothers to give the slightest hint to what "Reading Rainbow" is/was. I therefore find myself underwhelmed as to the significance.
I'm also struck by the incongruity of "every web-connected child" and "Universal access". Particularly when I suspect both are also missing the key word "American".
It makes no sense at all. It is totally moronic. The backspace is not a navigation key. My keyboard has plenty navigation keys, backspace is not one of them.
It makes as much sense as using the back button on your car's CD player to engage reverse gear and press the accelerator. It's totally not what you wanted, not what the button is for, annoying and dangerous.
The terrible truth is that as far as coherent plot and credible universe-building are concerned, Star Wars has always been third rate. When it does uncomplicated space-opera it's fun, but as soon as anyone tries to stretch it beyond that, it rapidly falls apart.
The best we can hope from Episode VII is that it doesn't try to mend all that went before it, and just concentrates on being good in itself.
So its just a case of "we're going to be alright, the regions that aren't were probably going to be fighting about something sooner or later anyway, so meh, whatcha gonna do?"
You should read some history. It's not uncommon for those who end up in a war zone to imagine "it could never happen here". All wars are about allocation of resources (Plenty are dressed up to be about other things, but the truth is they're not.) As soon as you have sudden scarcity of key resources, especially when they are unevenly distributed, you'll have war. Wars tend to escalate.
Slashdot Mirror
My point was more that Microsoft have tactically acknowledged that their servers are an open book to the TSA, but they think that people and companies will be keen on giving them even more to read.
Take my money now, dammit!
I'm getting a foldable car. It's going to be sweet! It must be true because it's on teh internet.
And to think that just the other day Microsoft were complaining that the NSA fallout was getting worse. Are they hoping to swamp them with simply too much data on Microsoft's servers?
Why isn't this standard procedure for all data repositories?
Doesn't matter how efficient and secure you are, if one person can wipe absolutely everything from one control panel then you have a risk that is not being addressed. And one that isn't even difficult to address.
Never under-estimate the depth of stupidity on the internet. Or forum contributors' willingness to dredge and recycle it.
I think it's unlikely that France would be training for the World Cup at the local public park.
In all seriousness, would anyone like to provide a glossary?
CS I can guess, but AP??
When did UIDs start being issued at birth?
What of mental issues or addiction?
Higher intake of calories could be themselves a symptom of a medical problem.
Not saying it's a significant number of cases, but likely to be higher than the direct medical problems that cause it.
Well this is my main problem with bitcoins.
Mining bitcoins is like mining gold (which is naturally I suppose where the term comes from). You are digging up something that is essentially useless in itself other than it has some rarity. But the big difference is that gold does have some use unrelated to its value as a medium of wealth. If we are going to devote time and energy to "mining" a fabricated and virtual object, could it not at least be something that has some other use or value ?
Constructing meaningless strings of numbers that are nothing except "complicated" seems like a poor use of resources.
"He was getting on a bit. He found new things confusing and increasingly harder to understand. So serves him right that I hacked his computer and stole his credit card numbers. That'll teach him to get old. He had it coming, only himself to blame. Get off the internet, you ancient fossil."
"Despite having learning difficulties, she really liked using the computer they had at the adult literacy classes. So she bought one after saving up her wages from her cleaning job and it really helped with her reading. But I phished her email password off her, and stole her bank details from an email her boss sent her. Some retards need to learn their limitations the hard way. The internet is dangerous and should only be used by smart people like me. Others only have themselves to blame when they get hurt."
To stretch your analogy:
It's not your employer who wants the copy. It's another company entirely. Your employer passes on the copy. The other company is happy, because they just got a month's worth of work for nothing. Your employer doesn't much care, at first. Sure, they got what they paid for, but then they start thinking that maybe next month they'll get a copy off some other company for nothing, and not need to pay you anything.
And you; well you're just screwed. Two companies are making money from the fruits of your labour, one without paying you a penny, and the another is planning on laying you off. I guess that serves you right for having an "obsolete business model".
Bad anology.
If I was foolish enough to leave my door open then I'd get stuff stolen. That would be bad enough. I wouldn't also expect the authorities to come around and hold me liable for having my stuff stolen.
... are you still a victim?
Yes. Unless you are suggesting that being foolish/ignorant/unaware makes it ok to commit crime against.
That's right. Blaming the victim has always been a popular tactic amongst the criminal classes.
"Rape" and "ruining the economy by embezzlement" are not the topics of this article.
A life sentence does not equate to life in prison. They are almost always eligible for parole after 15 years.
That's right, everyone talks like a dated comedy caricature. As indeed they do in every corner of the UK. Everyone at all times.
Hint: Google "Ali G", "Worzel Gummidge" or "Eliza Doolittle".
There are plenty of ways of looking at this problem constructively without resorting to name calling. Address the problem not the person.
You get people who are out of their depth. Whose skill-set is ill-matched to the job's demands. You even get those who are a dead-weight liability. But calling them "idiots", even with the quotes to distance yourself from the word, doesn't accomplish anything and is more counter-productive.
But one thing to consider; if you have an "idiot" on your team, then who is the bigger "idiot" who recruited them?
The point is that some people's machines may have sensitive information on it. Just because you personally can't think of any doesn't mean there are none. Maybe commercial secrets. Maybe juicey blackmail material. Maybe they live in an oppressive regime and are writing a book the government doesn't care for. Or maybe they've just got a sexual orientation that the religious police don't find acceptable, and any evidence of that would be fatal. Withdrawal of things like Truecrypt hurt these people too. It's not all about self-interest.
Do you trust all governments, and all future governments, to never use their backdoor into that for any other purpose, other than the all the good, wholesome things they say they need it for? You know, the holy trinity of "war against terrorism", "national security" and "protecting the children". You really think that "protecting economic interests" never, ever, features? Really?
If you have secret plans that the government should be interested in, then I want them to find out about it - because unless you are planning terrorist activity, there is no reason to fear so much.
I really hope you're not giving us the "if you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to fear" line? Because that one has always been bullshit.
You are totally clueless to what "the government should be interested in", and have even less of an idea on "the government is be interested in".
Neither the headline or OP bothers to give the slightest hint to what "Reading Rainbow" is/was. I therefore find myself underwhelmed as to the significance.
I'm also struck by the incongruity of "every web-connected child" and "Universal access". Particularly when I suspect both are also missing the key word "American".
It makes no sense at all. It is totally moronic. The backspace is not a navigation key. My keyboard has plenty navigation keys, backspace is not one of them.
It makes as much sense as using the back button on your car's CD player to engage reverse gear and press the accelerator. It's totally not what you wanted, not what the button is for, annoying and dangerous.
The terrible truth is that as far as coherent plot and credible universe-building are concerned, Star Wars has always been third rate. When it does uncomplicated space-opera it's fun, but as soon as anyone tries to stretch it beyond that, it rapidly falls apart.
The best we can hope from Episode VII is that it doesn't try to mend all that went before it, and just concentrates on being good in itself.
So its just a case of "we're going to be alright, the regions that aren't were probably going to be fighting about something sooner or later anyway, so meh, whatcha gonna do?"
You should read some history. It's not uncommon for those who end up in a war zone to imagine "it could never happen here". All wars are about allocation of resources (Plenty are dressed up to be about other things, but the truth is they're not.) As soon as you have sudden scarcity of key resources, especially when they are unevenly distributed, you'll have war. Wars tend to escalate.