I saw a talk this past summer about Microsoft's security architecture for Azure. The devil is in the details, of course. I am only really familiar with AWS but Microsoft's approach is quite different. In AWS, security is really up to you when you deploy an application to Amazon's cloud. Azure is tilting the other way -- they are providing an environment where security services are part of the platform.
For those who are interested in a technical discussion instead of Microsoft-bashing and snarky remarks about the NSA (how original!), I found a PDF that explains what they're doing. This is quite similar to the talk I attended. Some of it is over my head and some of it is not really spelled out in detail, but I can tell it is quite divergent from AWS's approach of saying "here's your cloud, now security is your problem."
Given how hard it is to securely configure a server on the Internet, I can see value in the cloud provider doing {some,most} of the work for you. My exposure to other cloud providers is limited -- is there another company out there who is trying to provide security as a ready-made feature of their platform offerings?
Why would MS appoint somebody to advise them on privacy of their customer's data? How does it benefit the shareholders?
Vaguely, by maintaining customers' loyalty and trust. Specifically, by keeping Microsoft out of the court battles that someothercompanies are fighting.
And I suspect there's been more Apple products sold in America than there are Christians.
At first I was skeptical. There are 234 million adults in the United States, of whom approximately 44% attend church regularly; so you're guessing that more than 103 million Apple devices have been sold in the US? Apple, Inc. has been around since 1976, so you may be right, if you count every iPod and every Mac and so on all the way back to the Apple I.
Presumably rats can be trained to sniff for other substances, as well. It's an open question whether each rat could be trained to detect more than one substance, or detectives would have to carry around a golf bag of rats, each wearing a little jacket labeled with what substance it can sniff. Still, better to carry a golf bag of rats than a golf bag of German shepherds!
Yeah, but the original story was from wired.co.uk, so the original author converted the cost to UK currency for his intended audience. It does look weird when the story gets re-circulated outside the UK.
That's possible, and if he did get any of the more-explicit photos he was demanding from underage girls, then he'd deserve it. Coercing minors to perform sexual acts is exactly what the child-pornography laws are intended to prevent!
That's optimistic. The media will report on the terrorists reporting on themselves, and keep milking the story long after the terrorists have got tired of it.
At first I was thinking it's no different -- television and radio have been abetting terrorists forever by sensaltionalizing on their attacks and keeping the stories in front of the public for weeks -- but then I realized there is a difference: editorial control. Independent media can filter and spin the message in the way that serves the media's interests (keeping people glued to their televisions). The terrorists want that control for themselves, to serve their own agenda.
The green movement needs to realize that the driver for economic activity trumps everything.
Economic progress *is* social progress. It allows people to allocate labor and resources to educating their children (and themselves), feeding the hungry, curing disease and curbing pollution.
There is a reason why developing nations are focused on development: it brings a better life to their people. And it's finally paying off in several regions of the world.
In my education, there was a big dead zone called junior high where the state curriculum taught very little new material -- just algebra and a little civics -- and spent most of the time rehashing what had been taught in elementary school. The prevailing wisdom that "raging hormones" made the junior-high kids unreceptive to new learning. Seriously, this is what principals and superintendents said. It's the most insulting thing to the pupils I can imagine.
Junior high was when some of my friends started taking drugs. I was reading a book a day just to kill the boredom, and I'm convinced I would have been better off skipping class and reading two books a day.
So you could give the kids something useful to learn during those two years, instead of spending taxpayer money to basically babysit them.
For those who don't know, Senators Wyden (D-OR), Udall (D-CO), Paul (R-KY) and Blumenthal (D-CT) say they will introduce a bill today to rein in the NSA.
TFA says this is for "Rich Internet Applications," that is, Java applets embedded in Web pages. It doesn't seem this would affect Java programs that you execute locally, such as (for example) Eclipse.
Is the experience of a test drive worth the $1000+ the dealer is going to gouge you for?
For new cars, I would rather pay 50 bucks to rent the same model for a day and get a feel for it -- without anyone trying to hold my driver's license hostage or demanding my home phone number.
The point of high-frequency trading is for the buyer to pull a fast one: to offer a price that an informed seller would not accept, before the seller can find out what the fair price should be.
If you compare the Tea Party or Occupy to the Civil Rights campaign, you will see the latter was much longer in duration, had far more people participating, and had locally major economic impact (the Montgomery bus boycott). So the reason the Tea Party and Occupy failed is they did not have enough people with enough commitment.
Revolutions are not always violent. "Revolution" just means "turning around" -- some kind of major reversal of the social order. I would say the Civil Rights movement in the US was a revolution. Nelson Mandela's election in South Africa was a revolution. (OK, there was violence in both cases, but the violence was mostly aimed at *suppressing* those revolutions, and it failed.)
The US is a long, long way from needing actual bloodshed to improve its society. A few hundred thousand people marching in the streets would be plenty effective.
Can you state the names of the treaties that the NSA is specifically violating?
No, and that's not my job. By now many people have said the NSA surveillance is a violation of international law. Presumably, those international laws are written down somewhere. We are still waiting for someone to take action to hold the US accountable.
That's not really an excuse, it's a feint. Spying on American citizens is a violation of the US Constitution. Spying on foreign citizens is a violation of treaties. So the sleight-of-hand is to pretend that because spying on foreigners doesn't violate the Constitution, it's OK.
It would be more correct to say, because spying on foreigners is a treaty violation and not a Constitutional violation, American citizens lack the legal standing to challenge it in court. I'm not a lawyer, but I would guess that an international court would be the place to raise a complaint, and it would require a foreign government to file a case.
I have not heard of anyone doing that, but that may be just a case of the famously selective American media not deigning to inform me. Because OMG did you see Miley Cyrus shaking her booty?!
Re:Never mind the Steambox ...
on
Boot To Zork
·
· Score: 1
I think the fact that you have a working VT101 is cooler than the fact that you have a Raspberry Pi.:-)
Slashdot Mirror
I saw a talk this past summer about Microsoft's security architecture for Azure. The devil is in the details, of course. I am only really familiar with AWS but Microsoft's approach is quite different. In AWS, security is really up to you when you deploy an application to Amazon's cloud. Azure is tilting the other way -- they are providing an environment where security services are part of the platform.
For those who are interested in a technical discussion instead of Microsoft-bashing and snarky remarks about the NSA (how original!), I found a PDF that explains what they're doing. This is quite similar to the talk I attended. Some of it is over my head and some of it is not really spelled out in detail, but I can tell it is quite divergent from AWS's approach of saying "here's your cloud, now security is your problem."
Given how hard it is to securely configure a server on the Internet, I can see value in the cloud provider doing {some,most} of the work for you. My exposure to other cloud providers is limited -- is there another company out there who is trying to provide security as a ready-made feature of their platform offerings?
Vaguely, by maintaining customers' loyalty and trust. Specifically, by keeping Microsoft out of the court battles that some other companies are fighting.
That's an incorrect statement, easily refuted by checking Wikipedia or a Google search.
At first I was skeptical. There are 234 million adults in the United States, of whom approximately 44% attend church regularly; so you're guessing that more than 103 million Apple devices have been sold in the US? Apple, Inc. has been around since 1976, so you may be right, if you count every iPod and every Mac and so on all the way back to the Apple I.
150K Euros is a slap on the wrist to a company Google's size, and almost certainly much less than the cost of coming into compliance.
The question is, after Google ignores the rules and just pays the fine, what's CNIL's next step? How far can the dispute escalate?
Presumably rats can be trained to sniff for other substances, as well. It's an open question whether each rat could be trained to detect more than one substance, or detectives would have to carry around a golf bag of rats, each wearing a little jacket labeled with what substance it can sniff. Still, better to carry a golf bag of rats than a golf bag of German shepherds!
Yeah, but the original story was from wired.co.uk, so the original author converted the cost to UK currency for his intended audience. It does look weird when the story gets re-circulated outside the UK.
That's possible, and if he did get any of the more-explicit photos he was demanding from underage girls, then he'd deserve it. Coercing minors to perform sexual acts is exactly what the child-pornography laws are intended to prevent!
This is worse than bullying, it's sexual harassment and extortion.
And I agree, Ms. Wolf did a courageous thing to stand up and present evidence so this lowlife could be stopped.
That's optimistic. The media will report on the terrorists reporting on themselves, and keep milking the story long after the terrorists have got tired of it.
At first I was thinking it's no different -- television and radio have been abetting terrorists forever by sensaltionalizing on their attacks and keeping the stories in front of the public for weeks -- but then I realized there is a difference: editorial control. Independent media can filter and spin the message in the way that serves the media's interests (keeping people glued to their televisions). The terrorists want that control for themselves, to serve their own agenda.
Economic progress *is* social progress. It allows people to allocate labor and resources to educating their children (and themselves), feeding the hungry, curing disease and curbing pollution.
There is a reason why developing nations are focused on development: it brings a better life to their people. And it's finally paying off in several regions of the world.
So it's only a problem if outsiders get access? You have a lot more faith in Google's present and future intentions than I do.
In my education, there was a big dead zone called junior high where the state curriculum taught very little new material -- just algebra and a little civics -- and spent most of the time rehashing what had been taught in elementary school. The prevailing wisdom that "raging hormones" made the junior-high kids unreceptive to new learning. Seriously, this is what principals and superintendents said. It's the most insulting thing to the pupils I can imagine.
Junior high was when some of my friends started taking drugs. I was reading a book a day just to kill the boredom, and I'm convinced I would have been better off skipping class and reading two books a day.
So you could give the kids something useful to learn during those two years, instead of spending taxpayer money to basically babysit them.
For those who don't know, Senators Wyden (D-OR), Udall (D-CO), Paul (R-KY) and Blumenthal (D-CT) say they will introduce a bill today to rein in the NSA.
TFA says this is for "Rich Internet Applications," that is, Java applets embedded in Web pages. It doesn't seem this would affect Java programs that you execute locally, such as (for example) Eclipse.
Is the experience of a test drive worth the $1000+ the dealer is going to gouge you for?
For new cars, I would rather pay 50 bucks to rent the same model for a day and get a feel for it -- without anyone trying to hold my driver's license hostage or demanding my home phone number.
The point of high-frequency trading is for the buyer to pull a fast one: to offer a price that an informed seller would not accept, before the seller can find out what the fair price should be.
NSA chairman's broker is based in Chicago. :-)
If Snowden's revelations do not count as a privacy apocalypse, I don't know what does.
If you compare the Tea Party or Occupy to the Civil Rights campaign, you will see the latter was much longer in duration, had far more people participating, and had locally major economic impact (the Montgomery bus boycott). So the reason the Tea Party and Occupy failed is they did not have enough people with enough commitment.
Give it time.
Revolutions are not always violent. "Revolution" just means "turning around" -- some kind of major reversal of the social order. I would say the Civil Rights movement in the US was a revolution. Nelson Mandela's election in South Africa was a revolution. (OK, there was violence in both cases, but the violence was mostly aimed at *suppressing* those revolutions, and it failed.)
The US is a long, long way from needing actual bloodshed to improve its society. A few hundred thousand people marching in the streets would be plenty effective.
No, and that's not my job. By now many people have said the NSA surveillance is a violation of international law. Presumably, those international laws are written down somewhere. We are still waiting for someone to take action to hold the US accountable.
That's not really an excuse, it's a feint. Spying on American citizens is a violation of the US Constitution. Spying on foreign citizens is a violation of treaties. So the sleight-of-hand is to pretend that because spying on foreigners doesn't violate the Constitution, it's OK.
It would be more correct to say, because spying on foreigners is a treaty violation and not a Constitutional violation, American citizens lack the legal standing to challenge it in court. I'm not a lawyer, but I would guess that an international court would be the place to raise a complaint, and it would require a foreign government to file a case.
I have not heard of anyone doing that, but that may be just a case of the famously selective American media not deigning to inform me. Because OMG did you see Miley Cyrus shaking her booty?!
I think the fact that you have a working VT101 is cooler than the fact that you have a Raspberry Pi. :-)