The problem is when the needles in the haystack are found they are immediately made available to everybody. There's a measure of Internet sensibility that isn't being adhered to.
When the medium changes, often the rules need to change too.
When the same piece of media blows up on multiple platforms, then get another piece of media. Even though a lot of other posts also lead towards product instability, maybe in this case it was a bad bit.
More than likely the reverse will happen: a company with a popular MMO game will reuse their engine for the needs of NASA. This would be the smartest move financially.
7. Sniffing out insider threats
If an individual suddenly stops communicating or socializing with others with whom they have previously had frequent contact, then the technology could alert investigators to such changes.
It happens a lot when people become bored of Facebook or whatever the social platform du jour is. There will be many false positives in a digital environment, this being one of them.
Any third party application you add to Facebook doesn't need a subpoena or warrant to access your personal and friend information back to the organization or company. That's the scary part. I would rather the police get it, however any of my foolish friends who sends the app to 25 friends (including myself) to get their love test results has exposed my information and possibly contextual relevancy about myself to god knows who, possibly even criminal organizations, and no doubt commercial entities who will target and market me to the hilt.
If a corporation wants to sack someone they will find reasons besides snooping on email or IM -- that's just another tool in the arsenal but won't change anything. Should an employer have the right to read employee's conversations? I say yes, but only if the conversation has occurred using the business infrastructure like business email, IM from inside the business, etc. To draw lines, all that stuff should be available to the employer and the employee should be aware and use restraint. If an employee wants privacy during work time they can easily set up a remote connection to a home computer and do all their personal communication from their home machine.
Ya, if we had kept full control of Tim Hortons we would now have space donuts. If we get rid of the space division of MacDonald, Dettwiler and Associates we'll have space nothing.
Simple. Pay for it out of tax payer money. Who doesn't use the Internet? Of those who don't directly use it, who is not indirectly affected by it (their institutions of choice use it).
The Internet is part of infrastructure like roads, water, etc. -- it's just virtual infrastructure.
I agree with your delination. There's also the gray area: We once had a programmer who deleted his Windows files because he didn't know what they were. Oddly enough he was a decent programmer, he had just never looked around the OS much I guess.
've worked with telemarketers, and the stuff people do to them is rather crazy.
Considering "crazy stuff" is done to telemarketers, presumably moreso than other industries, we have to assume there's something fundmentally wrong with telemarketing and *all* those involved, not just the heads of the company. I mean the average person being called never speaks to the head of a company -- they speak to a telemarketer on the front line. Telemarketing takes a special type of person.
Security isn't important enough to people right now to make the change away from IE (or older versions of it). A new browser deemed more secure will be met with less interest because those people not wanting to deal with current secure features in Firefox like NoScript and AdBlock plugins, surely they won't want to fiddle with something having even more restraints.
Microsoft fully intends to phase out the OS in favor of Vista
No shit Sherlock. You should have been around when the same was happening with Windows 95. Acting surprised over a prodcut cycle is definately not news.
A sentence about the IOC's affects on your Uncle's hotel followed immediately by disparaging comments related to the IOC through info about China. No conflict of interest here at all. It's a very concise business case against the IOC and to win favor for your poor Uncle's hotel. I expect many/. mods are trying to get a free night there.
I understand the joy of coding and excitement of creating your own applications for free, but I can never understand how programmers stand to watch their creations being usurped for commercial purposes. Whether it's abiding by the GPL or not, somebody else is making money from your creation. You would think the original programmer would have the wherewithal to market their own creation instead of leaving it for someone else. Even if you don't take the money for yourself, donate it back to the FSF or to another worthwhile cause. Maybe it's a case of lack of resources to start your product running. Maybe we need a group that can fill this niche for open source products. Maybe they already exist. If so I'd like to see discussion about it.
From a health insurer's perspective you'd be foolish to cover a disease for an individual if they have the bad gene. This isn't discrimination. It's facts and statistics, common sense from a business perspective. Arguably they could charge higher rates to those individuals (like they do to smokers). Health insurers already "discriminates" against you if you've prior disease. They can continue to do the same and it will be no more wrong than it is now.
Discrimination is unjust. Medical facts are not discrimination.
Well that was brief. Regardless, I take the stance that if a presidential candidate says they don't have a policy at the current moment on a certain issue, then we should not expect not to when they become president no matter how much they pander to our questions here and now. I mean, they always state that they haven't looked into something *but* "when I become president..." da dah da da and create a cursory answer.
Don't buy into it. Don't put your eggs in a basket which might exist.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is when the needles in the haystack are found they are immediately made available to everybody. There's a measure of Internet sensibility that isn't being adhered to. When the medium changes, often the rules need to change too.
I doubt you'll find me sitting at your computer when you arrive home.
When the same piece of media blows up on multiple platforms, then get another piece of media. Even though a lot of other posts also lead towards product instability, maybe in this case it was a bad bit.
"BS"..
What a nice acronym for it.
akward traditions, etc.) but they are definitely on the right path
Indeed it will be nice when they give up their traditions for yours -- a veritable turning point.
More than likely the reverse will happen: a company with a popular MMO game will reuse their engine for the needs of NASA. This would be the smartest move financially.
If an individual suddenly stops communicating or socializing with others with whom they have previously had frequent contact, then the technology could alert investigators to such changes.
It happens a lot when people become bored of Facebook or whatever the social platform du jour is. There will be many false positives in a digital environment, this being one of them.
Any third party application you add to Facebook doesn't need a subpoena or warrant to access your personal and friend information back to the organization or company. That's the scary part. I would rather the police get it, however any of my foolish friends who sends the app to 25 friends (including myself) to get their love test results has exposed my information and possibly contextual relevancy about myself to god knows who, possibly even criminal organizations, and no doubt commercial entities who will target and market me to the hilt.
If a corporation wants to sack someone they will find reasons besides snooping on email or IM -- that's just another tool in the arsenal but won't change anything. Should an employer have the right to read employee's conversations? I say yes, but only if the conversation has occurred using the business infrastructure like business email, IM from inside the business, etc. To draw lines, all that stuff should be available to the employer and the employee should be aware and use restraint. If an employee wants privacy during work time they can easily set up a remote connection to a home computer and do all their personal communication from their home machine.
Ya, if we had kept full control of Tim Hortons we would now have space donuts. If we get rid of the space division of MacDonald, Dettwiler and Associates we'll have space nothing.
Simple. Pay for it out of tax payer money. Who doesn't use the Internet? Of those who don't directly use it, who is not indirectly affected by it (their institutions of choice use it). The Internet is part of infrastructure like roads, water, etc. -- it's just virtual infrastructure.
If there is a no trespassing sign then ironically it will likely be in the google street view picture.
I agree with your delination. There's also the gray area: We once had a programmer who deleted his Windows files because he didn't know what they were. Oddly enough he was a decent programmer, he had just never looked around the OS much I guess.
Considering "crazy stuff" is done to telemarketers, presumably moreso than other industries, we have to assume there's something fundmentally wrong with telemarketing and *all* those involved, not just the heads of the company. I mean the average person being called never speaks to the head of a company -- they speak to a telemarketer on the front line. Telemarketing takes a special type of person.
Security isn't important enough to people right now to make the change away from IE (or older versions of it). A new browser deemed more secure will be met with less interest because those people not wanting to deal with current secure features in Firefox like NoScript and AdBlock plugins, surely they won't want to fiddle with something having even more restraints.
Let the scientists run amok!
right, left, flip, vertical, horizontal, flip ... all in various combinations, not much different than the longer methods
I saw those missiles fly by too, went right over my state.
No shit Sherlock. You should have been around when the same was happening with Windows 95. Acting surprised over a prodcut cycle is definately not news.
"an arm to hook up and pull the craft in" ... Does America get all its ideas from cartoon factories featuring funny robotic assembly lines?
A sentence about the IOC's affects on your Uncle's hotel followed immediately by disparaging comments related to the IOC through info about China. No conflict of interest here at all. It's a very concise business case against the IOC and to win favor for your poor Uncle's hotel. I expect many /. mods are trying to get a free night there.
From the aticle: "After DK shipped, a cow-orker of mine got a copy of the source listing" So how do you ork a cow?
I understand the joy of coding and excitement of creating your own applications for free, but I can never understand how programmers stand to watch their creations being usurped for commercial purposes. Whether it's abiding by the GPL or not, somebody else is making money from your creation. You would think the original programmer would have the wherewithal to market their own creation instead of leaving it for someone else. Even if you don't take the money for yourself, donate it back to the FSF or to another worthwhile cause. Maybe it's a case of lack of resources to start your product running. Maybe we need a group that can fill this niche for open source products. Maybe they already exist. If so I'd like to see discussion about it.
From a health insurer's perspective you'd be foolish to cover a disease for an individual if they have the bad gene. This isn't discrimination. It's facts and statistics, common sense from a business perspective. Arguably they could charge higher rates to those individuals (like they do to smokers). Health insurers already "discriminates" against you if you've prior disease. They can continue to do the same and it will be no more wrong than it is now. Discrimination is unjust. Medical facts are not discrimination.
Well that was brief. Regardless, I take the stance that if a presidential candidate says they don't have a policy at the current moment on a certain issue, then we should not expect not to when they become president no matter how much they pander to our questions here and now. I mean, they always state that they haven't looked into something *but* "when I become president..." da dah da da and create a cursory answer. Don't buy into it. Don't put your eggs in a basket which might exist.