Some smart, successful women may not be interested in partners less smart and successful than themselves. But many are just completely uninterested in whiners.
She may not want to get involved with someone who sees her as "fucking down."
Hint: Just because someone isn't interested in you doesn't mean she's striving for a life of loneliness.
How are you going to decide who sent the email? Headers? A charge at the point of origin, which is likely a bot whose owner has no clue about this stuff?
I will also note that nominal fees for postal mail does not prevent people from sending me junk mail.
The problem is the ISPs who do nothing to clean up their networks, or who engage in pink contracts, and so on.
TFA defines Full Disclosure for us, in case we were confused: "However, Marcus did take issue with security researchers who distribute samples of malicious software, a practice known as full disclosure."
No. Full disclosure is just that: disclosure. Distributing samples of malicious software is at best a proof of concept, but usually just irresponsible and/or malicious distribution of same.
Given this piece of intellectual dishonesty, I think that any doubt that McAfee was on the up-and-up with this article can be laid to rest.
No one is legally required to heed a fraud alert. They are commonly ignored. Even if reputable banks, etc. pay attention, the disreputable ones won't.
A credit freeze is much more useful, but the banks and credit reporting agencies are fighting it tooth and nail. There are a few states that allow them, but you can't get them if you live anywhere else.
No. The long term solution is to make it so your name and ssn aren't enough to buy a house.
The problem isn't really identity _theft,_ which is bad, but incredibly easy -- many times you can just make up a Social Security Number. For example, using citizens' Social Security Numbers for illegal workers is a huge problem that the government kind of just blinks it, because it's getting all those social security taxes. Just live with the assumption that your information is already out there.
The real problem is the fact that lenders want to give you money and will do it on the barest of pretexts. Look, here's a credit app that's been torn up and taped together and has the wrong address? Great! Send him a card! The name doesn't match this SSN? No problem! Here's your big-screen TV! Oh, you would like to wire all your assets to Elbonia? Excellent!
Instant credit is wonderful for capitalism. It means you don't have time to rethink your purchases, and they don't have time to check that it's really you.
You can not use shampoo, but that doesn't mean your hair is self-cleaning. You still need to clean it. Brushing thoroughly -- and more than just occasionally -- to remove dead skin cells, and a mild cleanser (baking soda, vinegar) to remove old hair oil will still be imporant. Shampoo does tend to strip the hair and scalp of needed oils, which is why most women and a lot of men follow up with conditioner. The longer your hair, the more of a problem this is at the ends. You can find a lot more information/argument on the Internet communities for people trying to grow their hair really long.
As for "needing" shampoo, though... Nah. It wasn't invented until the late 1800s/early 1900s anyway. The word originally meant a massage for the scalp.
Most of the hygiene products can be replaced with much cheaper, less fancy routines that work just as well and are better for you in the long run. Shampoo (usually) contains detergents that dry and damage hair over time -- not a big deal if your hair isn't any longer than shoulder-length, but it can be an issue for some people with longer hair. Most people have to use a conditioner afterward to keep their hair from feeling like straw. Shampoos and conditioners are also chock full of things that have nothing to do with cleaning, like dimethicones (which for some people cause awful build-up).
Deoderants often contain aluminum compounds that have been (non-definitively) linked with problems such as Alzheimers; the crystal deoderants use potassium alum, which doesn't have that problem. Even if this link turns out to be false, those yellow stains in the armpits of your shirt are definitely caused or exacerbated by alumnim salts. Soap is a good thing, but some of the stuff we put in soap to make stuff "cleaner" is hardly necessary -- antibacterials aren't good for you, because you need a certain amount of bacteria in the environment. It's been posited that the reason more only and eldest children in the U.S. have asthma is because their environments are too clean. Daily washing with harsher soaps can mess with your skin. I don't think that the parent was arguing that hygiene per se was unnecessary, just that a lot of the hygiene products being sold in the U.S. are expensive, and potentially damaging, overkill.
So, you're arguing _for_ DRM? Saying a company that doesn't use it in this situation has questionable judgment? Am I on the wrong site?
Apple is a hardware company. Software piracy does not make them cry; pissing off users, however, would be a problem. It's superconvenient to be able to just upgrade stuff without futzing with serial numbers.
10.4 won't install on computers that don't meet the hardware requirements. Yyou can still install it on such machines pretty easily with XPostFacto. I have a beige desktop running 10.4. It's kinda slow, but it doesn't crash.
Um. I think the point just proven is that Stallman will be turned away from an audience with a PM if he deliberately provokes it. Which is why he had the cameraman on hand.
Well, it's not so much that I think aspartame is ok, it's just that I dislike high fructose corn syrup just as much. For some reason it tastes heavy and too sweet. Real sugar Coke wins hands down, though.
Ever done a Coke tasting? With Cokes from around the world? They're different. One can get Mexican Coke with real sugar from Hispanic markets.
Well... I'm not British, but I've been declared an Honorary Brit for my grasp of irony. I'm also a professional editor and writer.
And this was just really poorly done. He has no control of tone at all. The "effete" crack in particular was icky (that's the technical term). Only an editor-in-chief could have published it, because anyone else would have been edited by someone who wasn't quite so in love with the thing. Just because it was intended to be satire, doesn't mean it was.
This is why most Americans are not allowed to have Sarcasm Licenses.
I have 2600 books in readerware, give or take a few, and it scales pretty well. It's cross platform and works with a cheap barcode scanner you might well already have -- the hilarious CueCat.
There are things I don't like about it -- it's the ugliest thing on my Mac by far, clunky, etc. -- but it's robust and scalable, and she who dies with the most books wins.:)
Dude, it's IM. Why are you expecting to have your relationship needs met through IM? It isn't working; ok, find something else. Phones are also not good; well, don't do that either. I generally dislike them for anything other than scheduling, at least as far as talking with local people goes (it's different for distant people). Try email, or more frequent dates, or something.
I am actually pretty unusual in the degree of attention I will give to someone in IM, but even I will be running around cleaning or working out or skimming blogs while chatting. If someone asks for my full attention over IM, I will often give it -- to a certain extent. But if they keep asking, I'll get really annoyed. It's too much of a burden on my time. I'm able to chat over IM a lot _because_ it's something I can multitask on. Someone who demands so much of my time, without being willing/able to, say, come over and help with the other stuff I can't do because I'm talking with them, will irritate me a lot.
Find some other way to get your Quality Time. Most people don't consider IM a vehicle for it, and you will be disappointed.
[P.S. I'm female. I offer this as a data point, not evidence of authority, because I'm weird, too. Obviously. I'm on/.]
Ross Anderson is actually very, very good, and very well-respected by People Who Know. He has a blog (not that that means he's good -- any idiot can have a blog -- but you can see how he thinks). I'm guessing that the newspaper was not entirely clear about what he was saying.
I may be wrong. But I'm not going to judge the guy on the basis of what a reporter quotes out of context.
"There's no patch because it's not a vulnerability, it's a virus. The only thing you can patch is the users that still won't follow directions and not open executable attachments. The OS is working as intended when it executes code you ask it to, which is how this virus gets on."
The OS is working as intended. Sure. But appliations in emails should not be able to hide the fact that they are applications. Applications should not be able to edit the registry without warning the user. Users should not need to run as Administrator to make their computers work properly. The registry is itself pretty sucktastic as far as security design goes.
The problem is that the OS is intended to be shiny and easy, and not even faintly secure.
That is incorrect. It is certainly possible to make a worm that infects a niche market; that was proven by the Witty Worm, which took down most boxes using ISS's various firewalls, very very quickly. There's a great discussion of this here. The vulnerable population was about 12,000 machines. There are a lot more than 12,000 Macs out there.
This makes the fact that it hasn't happened to Macs even more impressive.
This is all very nice, but it doesn't apply to those few people who already have an earlier version of iTunes installed and just ran the updater. There was no warning, no indication, and two DIFFERENT EULAs, neither of which mention Omniture (the third-party company doing this). You can't NOT send information unless you know beforehand to disable the ministore -- as soon as you play your first song (something one often wishes to do in iTunes, for some funny reason), you are sending in information.
They absolutely should have had a dialog box warning users of this. Or including it in the update description. This is a minor update, not something current users should have to go to the website to read up on. Is it pretty obvious what's going on? Sure. But opt-out doesn't work for spam, either.
The packets are being sent to a third party. This has been reported from the beginning. Omniture is not noted in the iTunes EULA the way, say, Gracenote CDDB is. Even if Apple isn't saving the information, what do we know about Omniture? We have no policy from them on this issue. Their business is collecting statistical information. They're a marketing firm.
For that matter, why does the data need to go to a third party at all? How are they related to the iTMS?
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, nonsense.
Some smart, successful women may not be interested in partners less smart and successful than themselves. But many are just completely uninterested in whiners.
She may not want to get involved with someone who sees her as "fucking down."
Hint: Just because someone isn't interested in you doesn't mean she's striving for a life of loneliness.
The garage holds 314 cars. The patrons pay $200 per month. The city grosses around $60,000 per month.
I'm just glad I don't drive.
Define "arcane." You can get CD installation disks from Apple for something like $10.
How are you going to decide who sent the email? Headers? A charge at the point of origin, which is likely a bot whose owner has no clue about this stuff?
I will also note that nominal fees for postal mail does not prevent people from sending me junk mail.
The problem is the ISPs who do nothing to clean up their networks, or who engage in pink contracts, and so on.
TFA defines Full Disclosure for us, in case we were confused: "However, Marcus did take issue with security researchers who distribute samples of malicious software, a practice known as full disclosure."
No. Full disclosure is just that: disclosure. Distributing samples of malicious software is at best a proof of concept, but usually just irresponsible and/or malicious distribution of same.
Given this piece of intellectual dishonesty, I think that any doubt that McAfee was on the up-and-up with this article can be laid to rest.
No one is legally required to heed a fraud alert. They are commonly ignored. Even if reputable banks, etc. pay attention, the disreputable ones won't.
A credit freeze is much more useful, but the banks and credit reporting agencies are fighting it tooth and nail. There are a few states that allow them, but you can't get them if you live anywhere else.
No. The long term solution is to make it so your name and ssn aren't enough to buy a house.
The problem isn't really identity _theft,_ which is bad, but incredibly easy -- many times you can just make up a Social Security Number. For example, using citizens' Social Security Numbers for illegal workers is a huge problem that the government kind of just blinks it, because it's getting all those social security taxes. Just live with the assumption that your information is already out there.
The real problem is the fact that lenders want to give you money and will do it on the barest of pretexts. Look, here's a credit app that's been torn up and taped together and has the wrong address? Great! Send him a card! The name doesn't match this SSN? No problem! Here's your big-screen TV! Oh, you would like to wire all your assets to Elbonia? Excellent!
Instant credit is wonderful for capitalism. It means you don't have time to rethink your purchases, and they don't have time to check that it's really you.
You can not use shampoo, but that doesn't mean your hair is self-cleaning. You still need to clean it. Brushing thoroughly -- and more than just occasionally -- to remove dead skin cells, and a mild cleanser (baking soda, vinegar) to remove old hair oil will still be imporant. Shampoo does tend to strip the hair and scalp of needed oils, which is why most women and a lot of men follow up with conditioner. The longer your hair, the more of a problem this is at the ends. You can find a lot more information/argument on the Internet communities for people trying to grow their hair really long.
As for "needing" shampoo, though... Nah. It wasn't invented until the late 1800s/early 1900s anyway. The word originally meant a massage for the scalp.
There's a difference between hygiene and Product.
Most of the hygiene products can be replaced with much cheaper, less fancy routines that work just as well and are better for you in the long run. Shampoo (usually) contains detergents that dry and damage hair over time -- not a big deal if your hair isn't any longer than shoulder-length, but it can be an issue for some people with longer hair. Most people have to use a conditioner afterward to keep their hair from feeling like straw. Shampoos and conditioners are also chock full of things that have nothing to do with cleaning, like dimethicones (which for some people cause awful build-up).
Deoderants often contain aluminum compounds that have been (non-definitively) linked with problems such as Alzheimers; the crystal deoderants use potassium alum, which doesn't have that problem. Even if this link turns out to be false, those yellow stains in the armpits of your shirt are definitely caused or exacerbated by alumnim salts. Soap is a good thing, but some of the stuff we put in soap to make stuff "cleaner" is hardly necessary -- antibacterials aren't good for you, because you need a certain amount of bacteria in the environment. It's been posited that the reason more only and eldest children in the U.S. have asthma is because their environments are too clean. Daily washing with harsher soaps can mess with your skin. I don't think that the parent was arguing that hygiene per se was unnecessary, just that a lot of the hygiene products being sold in the U.S. are expensive, and potentially damaging, overkill.
So, you're arguing _for_ DRM? Saying a company that doesn't use it in this situation has questionable judgment? Am I on the wrong site?
Apple is a hardware company. Software piracy does not make them cry; pissing off users, however, would be a problem. It's superconvenient to be able to just upgrade stuff without futzing with serial numbers.
10.4 won't install on computers that don't meet the hardware requirements. Yyou can still install it on such machines pretty easily with XPostFacto. I have a beige desktop running 10.4. It's kinda slow, but it doesn't crash.
Um. I think the point just proven is that Stallman will be turned away from an audience with a PM if he deliberately provokes it. Which is why he had the cameraman on hand.
I think that there is a difference between hypocrisy and not repeating your mistakes.
Well, it's not so much that I think aspartame is ok, it's just that I dislike high fructose corn syrup just as much. For some reason it tastes heavy and too sweet. Real sugar Coke wins hands down, though.
Ever done a Coke tasting? With Cokes from around the world? They're different. One can get Mexican Coke with real sugar from Hispanic markets.
Well... I'm not British, but I've been declared an Honorary Brit for my grasp of irony. I'm also a professional editor and writer.
And this was just really poorly done. He has no control of tone at all. The "effete" crack in particular was icky (that's the technical term). Only an editor-in-chief could have published it, because anyone else would have been edited by someone who wasn't quite so in love with the thing. Just because it was intended to be satire, doesn't mean it was.
This is why most Americans are not allowed to have Sarcasm Licenses.
Yes, Readerware.
:)
I have 2600 books in readerware, give or take a few, and it scales pretty well. It's cross platform and works with a cheap barcode scanner you might well already have -- the hilarious CueCat.
There are things I don't like about it -- it's the ugliest thing on my Mac by far, clunky, etc. -- but it's robust and scalable, and she who dies with the most books wins.
Dude, it's IM. Why are you expecting to have your relationship needs met through IM? It isn't working; ok, find something else. Phones are also not good; well, don't do that either. I generally dislike them for anything other than scheduling, at least as far as talking with local people goes (it's different for distant people). Try email, or more frequent dates, or something.
/.]
I am actually pretty unusual in the degree of attention I will give to someone in IM, but even I will be running around cleaning or working out or skimming blogs while chatting. If someone asks for my full attention over IM, I will often give it -- to a certain extent. But if they keep asking, I'll get really annoyed. It's too much of a burden on my time. I'm able to chat over IM a lot _because_ it's something I can multitask on. Someone who demands so much of my time, without being willing/able to, say, come over and help with the other stuff I can't do because I'm talking with them, will irritate me a lot.
Find some other way to get your Quality Time. Most people don't consider IM a vehicle for it, and you will be disappointed.
[P.S. I'm female. I offer this as a data point, not evidence of authority, because I'm weird, too. Obviously. I'm on
Did anyone else really hope they meant Google Moon Base? I was so going to apply.
It's a Mac. You don't _keep_ SSH on. It's disabled by default. You have to turn it on deliberately.
Ross Anderson is actually very, very good, and very well-respected by People Who Know. He has a blog (not that that means he's good -- any idiot can have a blog -- but you can see how he thinks). I'm guessing that the newspaper was not entirely clear about what he was saying.
I may be wrong. But I'm not going to judge the guy on the basis of what a reporter quotes out of context.
"There's no patch because it's not a vulnerability, it's a virus. The only thing you can patch is the users that still won't follow directions and not open executable attachments. The OS is working as intended when it executes code you ask it to, which is how this virus gets on."
The OS is working as intended. Sure. But appliations in emails should not be able to hide the fact that they are applications. Applications should not be able to edit the registry without warning the user. Users should not need to run as Administrator to make their computers work properly. The registry is itself pretty sucktastic as far as security design goes.
The problem is that the OS is intended to be shiny and easy, and not even faintly secure.
Is this Peak Copper?
That is incorrect. It is certainly possible to make a worm that infects a niche market; that was proven by the Witty Worm, which took down most boxes using ISS's various firewalls, very very quickly. There's a great discussion of this here. The vulnerable population was about 12,000 machines. There are a lot more than 12,000 Macs out there.
This makes the fact that it hasn't happened to Macs even more impressive.
I disagree that it's solely a user problem. There are a lot of stupid Mac and Linux users that don't get spyware, either.
This is all very nice, but it doesn't apply to those few people who already have an earlier version of iTunes installed and just ran the updater. There was no warning, no indication, and two DIFFERENT EULAs, neither of which mention Omniture (the third-party company doing this). You can't NOT send information unless you know beforehand to disable the ministore -- as soon as you play your first song (something one often wishes to do in iTunes, for some funny reason), you are sending in information.
They absolutely should have had a dialog box warning users of this. Or including it in the update description. This is a minor update, not something current users should have to go to the website to read up on. Is it pretty obvious what's going on? Sure. But opt-out doesn't work for spam, either.
The packets are being sent to a third party. This has been reported from the beginning. Omniture is not noted in the iTunes EULA the way, say, Gracenote CDDB is. Even if Apple isn't saving the information, what do we know about Omniture? We have no policy from them on this issue. Their business is collecting statistical information. They're a marketing firm.
For that matter, why does the data need to go to a third party at all? How are they related to the iTMS?