Get rid of it. Although, I'd prefer if they let us vote on it instead of just a bunch of assholes in brussels.
I remember when they tried this back in the 80s. The public confusion was more than palpable. I would like to see it removed, but at the same time do no look forward to the confusion again.
The report didn’t go unnoticed by Comcast either. In a response to the issue Jason Livingood, Executive Director Internet Systems Engineering at Comcast, told TorrentFreak: “Please note that we do not block websites and we are NOT blocking The Pirate Bay.”
Looks like Comcast management saw the problem and addressed it even before Pirate Bay asked for help. Unless you don't consider Executive Director as management.
I don't entirely believe this given my experience working inside Data Service Providers. I've called over to various regional NOC/SOCs (both within the ISP that I worked at and others that I had contact phone numbers to) and when it comes to backbone issues (speed/throughput, hand-off and even routing issues), unless they're getting an alarm from somewhere, they generally don't know that there is a problem. And even then they don't always get the necessary alarms to tell them this is a problem in the first place and will blithely go about their business without a second thought.
Given that this story hit the news what most probably happened is this. End-user (residential and even business) Customer Support was getting an influx of calls regarding connectivity issues to Pirate Bay. Various reps that are knowledgeable as to who they can contact about this as well as managers noticing a trend in calls sent the necessary data over to the NOC with proof of potential routing issues contacts were made and eventually the issue was resolved.
This Executive Director simply took the credit for whoever in the NOC was able to determine the problem and get the issue resolved.
No, but it can't be discredited either. Are you saying we should just take Anonymous at their word simply because they deny it? I'm not saying Sony's response or initial security wasn't pathetic, because it was, fact still remains it was *probably* Anonymous, especially when looking at the timeline of events.
Bull. If it were anonymous, Sony would've been screaming it from the parapets the instant that it had occurred and PSN went down. They could've ridden the media wave for it without even a second thought.
Sony didn't. Sony hid it. From the public, and from their user base. For far longer an amount of time than they should have. And to add salt to the wound, when they did actually get around to notifying their user base and the public, they did so from a blog. Not in getting in contact with their user base. Not without hitting the news. They hid it from there hoping that no one would notice because they didn't know the extent of the damage that had happened.
Some of the folk that I've watched on the various discussion boards about this act get their knickers in a twist about Anonymous being the cause of this and how evil and wrong they are... The thing is their actions to date (at least that which has actually hit the news) has been the actions of civil disobedience in a network/internet setting. Equipment has not been destroyed, code for web servers haven't been wiped. Bombs haven't been detonated. Lives have not been lost. They have renamed files and replaced them with their own, which is not entirely unlike plastering pamphlets over the sign of a store. A DDoS attack is not entirely unlike blocking the door to a cafe to prevent patrons from entering. The sort of thing Martin Luther King Jr. and another from the 50s and 60s did to get through Segregation and fight for civil rights. While I might not be old enough to have done that sort of thing back in the 60s, I did get the opportunity 30 years later when I was volunteering time for Queer Nation. What makes my actions considered civil rights, and Anonymous' the acts of hooligans/trolls/sophisticated hackers/immature children? Because they have the guts to be civilly disobedient, or because people are simply acting in fear of a faceless group and treating them like the boogie man?
Again, to date Anonymous' actions have been against corporations that seem to think they're above the law. That they can get away with raping the end user. Taking all this information from almost 100 million end-users -- e-mail addresses, usernames, passwords, credit card numbers? Attacking those that they have been defending would turn the mob against them and anything they are attempting to accomplish into a manhunt that would eventually bring the whole thing crashing down.
Sony is the one under scrutiny here. Any "proof" that Sony thinks they're posting against Anonymous is simply a red herring to cover up the fact that they have questions left unanswered.... And the lot of people agreeing it's Anonymous, are buying into that red herring... Hook, line and sinker...
No, it is not enough to track you with any real precision. I looked at my own data using the binary that was linked in the earlier article about this - There appears to be very little certainty, other than showing a "general region" of where you were.
You know, Sprint used to do something of the sort with this back in the day when CDMA was first/second generation. Working at a Sprint PCS store, when a customer was having problems with connectivity, we would take their phone to the back area and update the CDMA tower table in them. Presto, it worked again. If not then it might be something wrong with the phone and further testing would be required.
But the thing is, it's not the same. The difference is that this information is being accrued in a database on an iPhone is not necessarily known to the owner, as the EULA has it buried in so much legalese that it takes a lawyer to find it. Further it's attaching latitude and longitudinal information to the tower location that is completely unnecessary to such a cached database. After all -- cellphone towers have unique IDs. Some of them contain the geographical information in it's ID, most though are obscure and are contained within databases of the cell phone providers that put them up in the first place. And the cell phone -- in this case the iPhone -- have positively no need for such cached geographical information.
Which raises the question, why does a database contain Cellphone Tower IDs with geographical locational information? It's going to be utilized for some reason. And those reasons are chilling even to the casual mind.
Even that's fuzzy, because there are points showing up which are absolutely *not* in any location I've visited in recent memory, and points which I haven't come within hundreds of miles of in years
Do you remember all the routes you take? Can you remember having to take detours? Lord knows I do... But that's only because I'm on a bike, and it means I'm going to be pedaling more than normal. People in automobiles on the other hand don't. They only seem to complain when it's going to cost more to fill their tank of gas; not because they had to go 10 - 20 miles out of their way when going from point A to B.
Checking that link through google, I see the following in cache:
Warning: User 'drupal_16www7606.gmail-backup.com' has exceeded the 'max_questions' resource (current value: 10000) query: SELECT CASE WHEN status=1 THEN 0...
Why is there reason to be "concerned"? It is an interesting find, but that solar gas won't do much to harm Earth.
Having done a little scanning of this news from the source of the article, NASA, Space Weather, this is hardly rare and not the sign of an impending stellar apocalypse. From the less credible sources, the concerns that are sort of just below the surface is that the sun's going to lose it's fuel because of these holes in much the same manner as it was originally thought if we were to sent rockets into space would punch holes in the atmosphere of Earth causing all the air to funnel off into space.
One would hope such wacky conspiracy theorists would've died off around the same time as it was determined driving in a car more than 25 MPH would cause our bones to turn to jelly, but it would appear that they're still around.
Seems to me that these Cafès banning e-readers are trying to take a very contrarian and anti-establishment orientated clientèle and force them into some stereotypical behaviors and it would be easier to be herding cats.
There's something that doesn't seem to be covered in this article that perhaps should be mentioned/considered. What isn't mentioned it the bandwidth that this coffeehouses purchase for their establishments. We're not talking top-tier/top of the line DSL/Broadband from their local provider. We're talking minimum bandwidth/tier service just to process credit cards by Internet (instead of by DUN/Analog). And we're also not talking top of the line routers for this sort of work either. We're talking SoHo (at best) to home routers that don't always provide the bandwidth for the services paid. These are usually Mom & Pop businesses, not Starbucks, or Dunkin' Donuts or Caribou Coffee. And even then, my experience with such chains is that their connections are often middle-tiered at best. And some, I will even add from my experience with tech supporting their businesses actually throttle connection speeds on the wireless parts of their router for slower connections.
Now, it's one thing for laptop users to loiter, my experience is often even at the chain coffeehouses, it's usually 1 - 5 laptop users at best at any given time. And more often times than naught those laptop users know they are running on depreciative bandwidth connections (as most have some level of experience with this though YMMV naturally applies). Add 10... 20... even perhaps 30 more users with WiFi enabled eReaders to that mix who aren't there to read a newspaper or the books they have stored on their eReaders and are instead updating/reading their status messages, playing Facebook Games like Farmville or Bejeweled Blitz... who're happily trying to surf the web and watch YouTube Videos and working on the assumption they have the blindingly fast speeds they have at work, home, and school.
And when they find out they're not getting those speeds, who do you think they're going to bitch at first? Yep. You guessed it -- who's providing the Wireless Service in the coffeehouse. Experience has shown from my experience in Las Vegas Hotel Hospitality that when it comes to iPads and iPhones connecting to wireless out of the 100 or so calls I got a night, the 30 or so calls from iPad and iPhone users had less of a clue about their equipment, the difference in speeds between wireless vs. wired connections and couldn't imagine bandwidth capacity when you're dealing with a hotel at capacity with guests in rooms in the 5,000 - 10,000 range. Hell, it didn't compute to them the thought that bandwidth can be at capacity -- they seem to work on the assumption it's unlimited and comes down from the techno bandwidth viking or some such bullshit and not that the hotel could possibly be on a T1 or T3 line
And this was almost a year ago that I was dealing with this sort of thing.
Put that into a smaller venue -- like a coffeehouse for example -- and you can possibly see how quickly Managers would be to wanting to stop this. Particularly given the figures on sales of Kindles, Nooks and iPads hitting the news and even seeing it in their businesses before that article was written.
The German's and French have been doing it for a very long time without their society collapsing.
And the English, and the Australians, and the New Zealanders...
And Americans. The problem is that they don't do it in the cafeteria or at their desk, they go out to the local Applebee's or Chili's or local restaurant that has a bar. And like responsible adults, they don't overdo it to the point where it's attracting the sort of attention that feels like it's required to perform an intervention. I've been doing this sort of thing for years with middle and upper management, with Lawyers, and CEOs and CFOs as well. Even did that with the secretaries and admin assistants and even the Accounting Clerks of the office without so much as a blink of the eye.
But see the problem with some Americans is that they don't know how to drink at lunch and do so responsibly. Excess often happens because people don't understand the responsibility of knowing when to drink and when not to here. And as the saying goes, "one bad apple spoils the barrel." So this is why we have these rules in the Employee Handbook; because employers have to deal with the responsibility of those bad apples.
After all, it's not like they can't get your phone number and address in the phone directory.
I don't know how many times I see this bullshit spew whenever privacy and Facebook come up on/. Mention a landline to a lot of the twenty-somethings on FB and most of them will say, "oh yeah, my parents/grandparents have one of those." A lot of the twenty-somethings use cell phones as their primary contact telephone number and the last time I checked cell phone number are not in any published or online phone book.
So please, enough with the inane and incorrect rhetoric about "we can find you in the phone book". Only 40 somethings and older actually consider a land line a viable option for contact, younger than that, they normally like their mobiles.
StarCraft 2 has cheat codes in it, their use just disables achievements until you start a new game or load an old one. Part of the issue is that this guy was using a program that let him cheat while still earning achievements and, according to the comments on the Rock Paper Shotgun article, cheat in the multiplayer too - both of which messes with the ranking system and in turn, causes all kinds of weirdness with their online matchmaking.
Well, no. The moon's actually moving/away/ from Earth, slowly. In the very distant future, it'll be flung out of orbit. However, this will be long after the Sun goes nova.
The theory has been floated but this is the first time that I am aware that someone actually worked out the mechanics of it. It's not 'proof' but it's a lot better than just conjecture.
Disclaimer: I am not an astrophysicist or a planetary expert. It's possible that someone did work out the same thing in detail. If so I just haven't seen it.
Actually this is not the first time. This similar theory had been foisted in the 70s and done so without really pretty CGI-created computer models to boot (although it was done with animations). I remember it being discussed on Nova or some similar show, as I recall watching it in Junior High School during one of those great moments were I wasn't staring at a chalkboard and listening to my rather dull science teacher droning me to sleep.
Pity that I don't remember the exact show, 'else I'd be seeing if the video was put up online.
I love the fact that he's had to close comments off his own page hahahaha I scrolled down to see what comments there were after reading the first sentence or two, saw it was closed
At 10:50 PM EDT, going to look at the page, he had completely removed the article altogether. Sucks to be him being caught making a complete fool of himself
I actually support removing access privileges instantly in all cases where the employee is leaving: even if they're working out their final two weeks or something, it's better to have them having to do their work through someone who needs to learn how to do their job, than it is to have them "writing documentation" or "doing training" or any of a number of other stupid transition methods.
BellSouth had an excellent policy for this -- one that I was impressed with when I worked for them back in the late 90s. If an employee handed in their two week notice, BellSouth would let the employee go and pay the two weeks they were supposed to work there rather than letting them sabotage or slack the two weeks that they would be there before moving on.
Escorting people out of the building and revoking their access privileges the second they get fired is actually warranted?
Having recently left a job, I took nothing from my desk. No office supplies, no company information, no customer information. Nothing. I did instead leave a box of gel-pens ($10.00), a Blue-Tooth Cordless headset ($200) to someone that asked for it. I left my card, my security keyfob, and the original headset that was given to me on my boss' desk with a thank you card and a note explaining that I would be getting in contact with his manager to discuss some of the issues as to why I left and do so in a professional manner.
Perhaps if companies stopped anally raping their employees without lubrication, treating them with a shred of dignity instead of potential criminals, and paid them somewhere reasonable, perhaps this feel for employees to feel like they should steal from the company as they felt the company had stolen from them would be less likely to happen.
Patch Tuesday is not the definition of prompt security updates.
And... Prompting security and feature updates daily like a firehose is? There comes a point when weekly and even monthly scheduling of updates is actually more acceptable both to the end user as well as the IT people that have to ensure the latest patch doesn't suddenly break something vital for enterprise operations, than firehosing them with daily fixes, patches, feature upgrades, etc.
Although truth be told, I often see Critical patches being pushed to the end and enterprise users outside of the famed monthly "Patch Tuesday" push to the herd. Perhaps you forget about those? Or are you like the herd and simply accept them to be installed and your system restarted while you're sleeping?
IMNERHO I think that texting is a perfect way to rid the gene pool of such stupidity. Now all we have to do is convince the smart people to telecommute to work more.
Even if you would prefer to use your computer via voice recognition, putting enough computer to do voice recognition on your wrist is going to make you look like some kind of digital retard.
You mean like the time Kirk had a communicator on his wrist and talked into it?
You mean like that obscure commercial from the 90s with the buffoon in the park with interactive glasses buying and selling stocks online and looking like some raving nutter in Trafalgar Square on a Soapbox?
Yes, this is different from people screaming into cell phones in public or talking on them like they're walkie talkies nowadays how precisely?
Hollywood should stop being so focused on special effects and shoud focus more on a decent plot and make damned well sure that the actors can and will make that plot interesting.
What else are they going to use to cover up the fact that Hollywood is filled with 95% hacks with no talent to actually write and infinite amounts of talent to ass-kiss?
That everyone should stick some coloured wires into cardboard tubes, then leave them lying about all over the place. The more the merrier.
This sort of reminds me of the television show I had seen some years back in the Middle East where the host of the show (or several of his co-hosts) would go to various parts of a city, act somewhat suspiciously and then leaving a briefcase in the middle of the road and run off suddenly in some random direction.
Hilarity would ensue depending on the individuals had seen the host/co-hosts doing this. Some would run in the opposite direction thinking it a bomb. Others would chase down the man and try to apprehend him...
I'm rather surprised this hasn't been recreated here in the states given the way we react to the dreaded plague knows as terrorism
I use Linux. Its true that there are some viruses for Linux, its just that I haven't ever had one.
That's because it has what? 1% or 2% of the worldwide desktop machines? It really doesn't qualify to warrant the attention of serious hacking... There's no need because 1. it's free, 2. the community that it supports cherishes it, and 3. it's users are generally savvy enough to know what to click on and what not to click on when they're out on the net.
If Linux ever does gain more popularity in the desktop market, rest assured it'll suffer the same fate as Apple/Mac did when it grew in popularity. This will definitely happen when 1. it is no longer free, 2. the community becomes snobbier than it already is, and 3. it becomes easy enough for Windows users to migrate without being afraid of seeing a terminal window.
Impossible I know, but I thought the same when Mac became more popular.
Slashdot Mirror
...How can you sell MY data when I haven't driven since 1993? And you kids wonder why I don't own a car.
Get rid of it. Although, I'd prefer if they let us vote on it instead of just a bunch of assholes in brussels.
I remember when they tried this back in the 80s. The public confusion was more than palpable. I would like to see it removed, but at the same time do no look forward to the confusion again.
From TFA:
The report didn’t go unnoticed by Comcast either. In a response to the issue Jason Livingood, Executive Director Internet Systems Engineering at Comcast, told TorrentFreak: “Please note that we do not block websites and we are NOT blocking The Pirate Bay.”
Looks like Comcast management saw the problem and addressed it even before Pirate Bay asked for help. Unless you don't consider Executive Director as management.
I don't entirely believe this given my experience working inside Data Service Providers. I've called over to various regional NOC/SOCs (both within the ISP that I worked at and others that I had contact phone numbers to) and when it comes to backbone issues (speed/throughput, hand-off and even routing issues), unless they're getting an alarm from somewhere, they generally don't know that there is a problem. And even then they don't always get the necessary alarms to tell them this is a problem in the first place and will blithely go about their business without a second thought.
Given that this story hit the news what most probably happened is this. End-user (residential and even business) Customer Support was getting an influx of calls regarding connectivity issues to Pirate Bay. Various reps that are knowledgeable as to who they can contact about this as well as managers noticing a trend in calls sent the necessary data over to the NOC with proof of potential routing issues contacts were made and eventually the issue was resolved.
This Executive Director simply took the credit for whoever in the NOC was able to determine the problem and get the issue resolved.
No, but it can't be discredited either. Are you saying we should just take Anonymous at their word simply because they deny it? I'm not saying Sony's response or initial security wasn't pathetic, because it was, fact still remains it was *probably* Anonymous, especially when looking at the timeline of events.
Bull. If it were anonymous, Sony would've been screaming it from the parapets the instant that it had occurred and PSN went down. They could've ridden the media wave for it without even a second thought.
Sony didn't. Sony hid it. From the public, and from their user base. For far longer an amount of time than they should have. And to add salt to the wound, when they did actually get around to notifying their user base and the public, they did so from a blog. Not in getting in contact with their user base. Not without hitting the news. They hid it from there hoping that no one would notice because they didn't know the extent of the damage that had happened.
Some of the folk that I've watched on the various discussion boards about this act get their knickers in a twist about Anonymous being the cause of this and how evil and wrong they are... The thing is their actions to date (at least that which has actually hit the news) has been the actions of civil disobedience in a network/internet setting. Equipment has not been destroyed, code for web servers haven't been wiped. Bombs haven't been detonated. Lives have not been lost. They have renamed files and replaced them with their own, which is not entirely unlike plastering pamphlets over the sign of a store. A DDoS attack is not entirely unlike blocking the door to a cafe to prevent patrons from entering. The sort of thing Martin Luther King Jr. and another from the 50s and 60s did to get through Segregation and fight for civil rights. While I might not be old enough to have done that sort of thing back in the 60s, I did get the opportunity 30 years later when I was volunteering time for Queer Nation. What makes my actions considered civil rights, and Anonymous' the acts of hooligans/trolls/sophisticated hackers/immature children? Because they have the guts to be civilly disobedient, or because people are simply acting in fear of a faceless group and treating them like the boogie man?
Again, to date Anonymous' actions have been against corporations that seem to think they're above the law. That they can get away with raping the end user. Taking all this information from almost 100 million end-users -- e-mail addresses, usernames, passwords, credit card numbers? Attacking those that they have been defending would turn the mob against them and anything they are attempting to accomplish into a manhunt that would eventually bring the whole thing crashing down.
Sony is the one under scrutiny here. Any "proof" that Sony thinks they're posting against Anonymous is simply a red herring to cover up the fact that they have questions left unanswered.... And the lot of people agreeing it's Anonymous, are buying into that red herring... Hook, line and sinker...
No, it is not enough to track you with any real precision. I looked at my own data using the binary that was linked in the earlier article about this - There appears to be very little certainty, other than showing a "general region" of where you were.
You know, Sprint used to do something of the sort with this back in the day when CDMA was first/second generation. Working at a Sprint PCS store, when a customer was having problems with connectivity, we would take their phone to the back area and update the CDMA tower table in them. Presto, it worked again. If not then it might be something wrong with the phone and further testing would be required.
But the thing is, it's not the same. The difference is that this information is being accrued in a database on an iPhone is not necessarily known to the owner, as the EULA has it buried in so much legalese that it takes a lawyer to find it. Further it's attaching latitude and longitudinal information to the tower location that is completely unnecessary to such a cached database. After all -- cellphone towers have unique IDs. Some of them contain the geographical information in it's ID, most though are obscure and are contained within databases of the cell phone providers that put them up in the first place. And the cell phone -- in this case the iPhone -- have positively no need for such cached geographical information.
Which raises the question, why does a database contain Cellphone Tower IDs with geographical locational information? It's going to be utilized for some reason. And those reasons are chilling even to the casual mind.
Even that's fuzzy, because there are points showing up which are absolutely *not* in any location I've visited in recent memory, and points which I haven't come within hundreds of miles of in years
Do you remember all the routes you take? Can you remember having to take detours? Lord knows I do... But that's only because I'm on a bike, and it means I'm going to be pedaling more than normal. People in automobiles on the other hand don't. They only seem to complain when it's going to cost more to fill their tank of gas; not because they had to go 10 - 20 miles out of their way when going from point A to B.
that links to a blank page, or is that a joke ?
Checking that link through google, I see the following in cache:
Warning: User 'drupal_16www7606.gmail-backup.com' has exceeded the 'max_questions' resource (current value: 10000) query: SELECT CASE WHEN status=1 THEN 0 ...
Most amusing
Why is there reason to be "concerned"? It is an interesting find, but that solar gas won't do much to harm Earth.
Having done a little scanning of this news from the source of the article, NASA, Space Weather, this is hardly rare and not the sign of an impending stellar apocalypse. From the less credible sources, the concerns that are sort of just below the surface is that the sun's going to lose it's fuel because of these holes in much the same manner as it was originally thought if we were to sent rockets into space would punch holes in the atmosphere of Earth causing all the air to funnel off into space.
One would hope such wacky conspiracy theorists would've died off around the same time as it was determined driving in a car more than 25 MPH would cause our bones to turn to jelly, but it would appear that they're still around.
Seems to me that these Cafès banning e-readers are trying to take a very contrarian and anti-establishment orientated clientèle and force them into some stereotypical behaviors and it would be easier to be herding cats.
There's something that doesn't seem to be covered in this article that perhaps should be mentioned/considered. What isn't mentioned it the bandwidth that this coffeehouses purchase for their establishments. We're not talking top-tier/top of the line DSL/Broadband from their local provider. We're talking minimum bandwidth/tier service just to process credit cards by Internet (instead of by DUN/Analog). And we're also not talking top of the line routers for this sort of work either. We're talking SoHo (at best) to home routers that don't always provide the bandwidth for the services paid. These are usually Mom & Pop businesses, not Starbucks, or Dunkin' Donuts or Caribou Coffee. And even then, my experience with such chains is that their connections are often middle-tiered at best. And some, I will even add from my experience with tech supporting their businesses actually throttle connection speeds on the wireless parts of their router for slower connections.
Now, it's one thing for laptop users to loiter, my experience is often even at the chain coffeehouses, it's usually 1 - 5 laptop users at best at any given time. And more often times than naught those laptop users know they are running on depreciative bandwidth connections (as most have some level of experience with this though YMMV naturally applies). Add 10... 20... even perhaps 30 more users with WiFi enabled eReaders to that mix who aren't there to read a newspaper or the books they have stored on their eReaders and are instead updating/reading their status messages, playing Facebook Games like Farmville or Bejeweled Blitz... who're happily trying to surf the web and watch YouTube Videos and working on the assumption they have the blindingly fast speeds they have at work, home, and school.
And when they find out they're not getting those speeds, who do you think they're going to bitch at first? Yep. You guessed it -- who's providing the Wireless Service in the coffeehouse. Experience has shown from my experience in Las Vegas Hotel Hospitality that when it comes to iPads and iPhones connecting to wireless out of the 100 or so calls I got a night, the 30 or so calls from iPad and iPhone users had less of a clue about their equipment, the difference in speeds between wireless vs. wired connections and couldn't imagine bandwidth capacity when you're dealing with a hotel at capacity with guests in rooms in the 5,000 - 10,000 range. Hell, it didn't compute to them the thought that bandwidth can be at capacity -- they seem to work on the assumption it's unlimited and comes down from the techno bandwidth viking or some such bullshit and not that the hotel could possibly be on a T1 or T3 line
And this was almost a year ago that I was dealing with this sort of thing.
Put that into a smaller venue -- like a coffeehouse for example -- and you can possibly see how quickly Managers would be to wanting to stop this. Particularly given the figures on sales of Kindles, Nooks and iPads hitting the news and even seeing it in their businesses before that article was written.
The German's and French have been doing it for a very long time without their society collapsing.
And the English, and the Australians, and the New Zealanders...
And Americans. The problem is that they don't do it in the cafeteria or at their desk, they go out to the local Applebee's or Chili's or local restaurant that has a bar. And like responsible adults, they don't overdo it to the point where it's attracting the sort of attention that feels like it's required to perform an intervention. I've been doing this sort of thing for years with middle and upper management, with Lawyers, and CEOs and CFOs as well. Even did that with the secretaries and admin assistants and even the Accounting Clerks of the office without so much as a blink of the eye.
But see the problem with some Americans is that they don't know how to drink at lunch and do so responsibly. Excess often happens because people don't understand the responsibility of knowing when to drink and when not to here. And as the saying goes, "one bad apple spoils the barrel." So this is why we have these rules in the Employee Handbook; because employers have to deal with the responsibility of those bad apples.
After all, it's not like they can't get your phone number and address in the phone directory.
I don't know how many times I see this bullshit spew whenever privacy and Facebook come up on /. Mention a landline to a lot of the twenty-somethings on FB and most of them will say, "oh yeah, my parents/grandparents have one of those." A lot of the twenty-somethings use cell phones as their primary contact telephone number and the last time I checked cell phone number are not in any published or online phone book.
So please, enough with the inane and incorrect rhetoric about "we can find you in the phone book". Only 40 somethings and older actually consider a land line a viable option for contact, younger than that, they normally like their mobiles.
StarCraft 2 has cheat codes in it, their use just disables achievements until you start a new game or load an old one. Part of the issue is that this guy was using a program that let him cheat while still earning achievements and, according to the comments on the Rock Paper Shotgun article, cheat in the multiplayer too - both of which messes with the ranking system and in turn, causes all kinds of weirdness with their online matchmaking.
pfft... And this is what I think of Achievment Systems.
Well, no. The moon's actually moving /away/ from Earth, slowly. In the very distant future, it'll be flung out of orbit. However, this will be long after the Sun goes nova.
Pity we haven't sped it along as shown here. :D
The theory has been floated but this is the first time that I am aware that someone actually worked out the mechanics of it. It's not 'proof' but it's a lot better than just conjecture.
Disclaimer: I am not an astrophysicist or a planetary expert. It's possible that someone did work out the same thing in detail. If so I just haven't seen it.
Actually this is not the first time. This similar theory had been foisted in the 70s and done so without really pretty CGI-created computer models to boot (although it was done with animations). I remember it being discussed on Nova or some similar show, as I recall watching it in Junior High School during one of those great moments were I wasn't staring at a chalkboard and listening to my rather dull science teacher droning me to sleep.
Pity that I don't remember the exact show, 'else I'd be seeing if the video was put up online.
I love the fact that he's had to close comments off his own page hahahaha I scrolled down to see what comments there were after reading the first sentence or two, saw it was closed
At 10:50 PM EDT, going to look at the page, he had completely removed the article altogether. Sucks to be him being caught making a complete fool of himself
I actually support removing access privileges instantly in all cases where the employee is leaving: even if they're working out their final two weeks or something, it's better to have them having to do their work through someone who needs to learn how to do their job, than it is to have them "writing documentation" or "doing training" or any of a number of other stupid transition methods.
BellSouth had an excellent policy for this -- one that I was impressed with when I worked for them back in the late 90s. If an employee handed in their two week notice, BellSouth would let the employee go and pay the two weeks they were supposed to work there rather than letting them sabotage or slack the two weeks that they would be there before moving on.
Escorting people out of the building and revoking their access privileges the second they get fired is actually warranted?
Having recently left a job, I took nothing from my desk. No office supplies, no company information, no customer information. Nothing. I did instead leave a box of gel-pens ($10.00), a Blue-Tooth Cordless headset ($200) to someone that asked for it. I left my card, my security keyfob, and the original headset that was given to me on my boss' desk with a thank you card and a note explaining that I would be getting in contact with his manager to discuss some of the issues as to why I left and do so in a professional manner.
Perhaps if companies stopped anally raping their employees without lubrication, treating them with a shred of dignity instead of potential criminals, and paid them somewhere reasonable, perhaps this feel for employees to feel like they should steal from the company as they felt the company had stolen from them would be less likely to happen.
Patch Tuesday is not the definition of prompt security updates.
And... Prompting security and feature updates daily like a firehose is? There comes a point when weekly and even monthly scheduling of updates is actually more acceptable both to the end user as well as the IT people that have to ensure the latest patch doesn't suddenly break something vital for enterprise operations, than firehosing them with daily fixes, patches, feature upgrades, etc.
Although truth be told, I often see Critical patches being pushed to the end and enterprise users outside of the famed monthly "Patch Tuesday" push to the herd. Perhaps you forget about those? Or are you like the herd and simply accept them to be installed and your system restarted while you're sleeping?
IMHO texting while driving is active stupidity.
IMNERHO I think that texting is a perfect way to rid the gene pool of such stupidity. Now all we have to do is convince the smart people to telecommute to work more.
Even if you would prefer to use your computer via voice recognition, putting enough computer to do voice recognition on your wrist is going to make you look like some kind of digital retard.
You mean like the time Kirk had a communicator on his wrist and talked into it?
You mean like that obscure commercial from the 90s with the buffoon in the park with interactive glasses buying and selling stocks online and looking like some raving nutter in Trafalgar Square on a Soapbox?
Yes, this is different from people screaming into cell phones in public or talking on them like they're walkie talkies nowadays how precisely?
What the Saturn V encountered was an Iridescent Cloud
Hollywood should stop being so focused on special effects and shoud focus more on a decent plot and make damned well sure that the actors can and will make that plot interesting.
What else are they going to use to cover up the fact that Hollywood is filled with 95% hacks with no talent to actually write and infinite amounts of talent to ass-kiss?
Sure, Apple's had some really bad products over time - but what do you expect from a company that big which survived that long?
Funny how quickly we forget this article, hmmm? The Apple of Microsoft's Eye.
That everyone should stick some coloured wires into cardboard tubes, then leave them lying about all over the place. The more the merrier.
This sort of reminds me of the television show I had seen some years back in the Middle East where the host of the show (or several of his co-hosts) would go to various parts of a city, act somewhat suspiciously and then leaving a briefcase in the middle of the road and run off suddenly in some random direction.
Hilarity would ensue depending on the individuals had seen the host/co-hosts doing this. Some would run in the opposite direction thinking it a bomb. Others would chase down the man and try to apprehend him...
I'm rather surprised this hasn't been recreated here in the states given the way we react to the dreaded plague knows as terrorism
I use Linux. Its true that there are some viruses for Linux, its just that I haven't ever had one.
That's because it has what? 1% or 2% of the worldwide desktop machines? It really doesn't qualify to warrant the attention of serious hacking... There's no need because 1. it's free, 2. the community that it supports cherishes it, and 3. it's users are generally savvy enough to know what to click on and what not to click on when they're out on the net.
If Linux ever does gain more popularity in the desktop market, rest assured it'll suffer the same fate as Apple/Mac did when it grew in popularity. This will definitely happen when 1. it is no longer free, 2. the community becomes snobbier than it already is, and 3. it becomes easy enough for Windows users to migrate without being afraid of seeing a terminal window.
Impossible I know, but I thought the same when Mac became more popular.
Ninjas don't scare me because I am a pirate.
That's all right. Pirates don't scare me because I'm a Ninja.