A store offering a subscription arrangement needs to search for upcoming expiration dates so that it can 1. notify each subscriber that the card on file with the store is about to expire and 2. charge the ETF on the last valid day if the subscriber fails to update the card by the expiration date.
Why do the expiration dates need to be encrypted? A thief can't do anything with just the expiration date without also knowing the CC number
Sometimes automated systems make mistakes, and when they do, they are corrected. Get over it and stop whining.
And by the way, all of the sites mentioned have been fixed.
The New Braunfels Republican Women (www.nbrw.com) > Political/Social Advocacy
Weston Community Children's Association (www.wccakids.org) > Charitable Organizations
Rotary Club of Midland, Ontario (www.clubrunner.ca) > Charitable Organizations
The majority of the work that most employees do likely revolves around email or documents/spreadsheets/presentations, all of which have native OSX software.
For the few jobs that require software that only runs on Windows, there is always virtualization, or remote desktop into an MS terminal server.
"But it also raises the question of whether targeting anonymity services to hunt out fraudsters could have chilling effects for harmless Tor users trying to protect their privacy online"
Umm.. the user is ordering something using their name, credit card, and address. They are not going to use Tor to protect their anonymity.
That statement was not about normal people using TOR for online purchases. It was about people using TOR to hide their identity when doing things like posting to a controversial website, or whistleblowing. If this software catches on, and websites start using it to block TOR users, then it would make TOR less useful for posting anonymously.
But I didn't give them permission to log anything for such purposes.
I fully expect my government to not violate people's privacy and conduct surveillance on them to stop the evil bogeymen.
Then don't use the USPS. There are plenty of other mail transport services out there, that may or may not do this same tracking, and may or may not provide said tracking to the government upon request.
Security. Properly configured, a router with public-access Wi-Fi should not represent a security risk for those on the router's private and secure network. The technical reasons for this are a bit complicated; read an Open Wireless Movement explanation at openwireless.org.
Service degradation. Those using the slower public portion of a home router typically won't degrade performance on the faster private side. Future routers would speed up public access when the private side isn't being used and give the private network priority if required.
Legal liability. Those who fear being blamed for misuse of their public Wi-Fi signals are said to be protected under a "safe harbor" doctrine akin to that protecting Internet service providers. In other words, they're likely not liable for the mischief of porn purveyors or music pirates.
Freeloading. Fear of freeloaders is misplaced, the Open Wireless Movement believes. "Sharing capacity helps everyone," it says. "If you've ever been without Internet access and needed to check an email, you will remember how useful open networks can be in a pinch."
What does this solve? Your traffic still goes through the ISP router after it goes through your router. Your solution only solves one of the 3 questions asked by GP.
Sure, the game companies may not want this released, but does the FBI care? If they investigate, and find and arrest the hacker, it's up to the D.A. whether or not to prosecute, not the game companies. This seems like a worthless insurance policy/blackmail, because the people going after him are unaffected by the action of him releasing the encryption key.
Why should we encourage crime sprees? If I know I will only get charged with one instance of a crime, I'm going to rob a dozen 7-11s instead of one. You should not be rewarded for committing more crimes.
I don't think that is what is happening. You can certainly get charged with multiple charges of the same crime. It would be like if you robbed a dozen 7/11 stores in a dozen states, but they could only prove that you robbed one. You can either go to trial in 12 states, or take the plea bargain for just one robbery, and save yourself the 11 other trials.
If he has no money to fight his legal battles, he has no money to sue Google or anyone else.
I'm sure one of the many patent troll companies would be happy to foot the bill for the legal costs in return for a large chunk of the settlement if they win.
One is about your ego and broadcasting to an audience of other people who are all busy worrying about their ego and broadcasting to their audience
I'd say that both sites fit that description. LinkedIn has turned into the "Facebook for professionals". It seems like most people's goal on LinkedIn is to connect with as many people as they can to get their "network" as large as they can. I have gotten LinkedIn requests from people that I met at a conference several years ago, and talked to for 5 minutes.
LinkedIn used to be about creating a network of trusted colleagues, that you want to keep in touch with, so that you could get trusted introductions to people you didn't know. If I trust person A, and person A trusts person B, B trusts C; therefore if person C is looking for a job opportunity, then they have a good chance of being a reasonably good candidate. That whole concept seems to have gotten lost in the last few years, and now it is all about having as many connections as you can.
What we need is more televisions that have software built into them that can access all of the video networks directly. There are already DVD/Blu-Ray players that can play from Netflix/Amazon/Hulu/Youtube, etc.
But you can't be compelled to provide evidence against yourself that the government doesn't know you have.
What if the drive contains the evidence that they know you have, but it also contains other evidence that they do NOT know you have, which one would have precedence? If decrypting the drive will give them access to other evidence that would incriminate you in another crime.
The major issue I see with this plan, is most datacenters allow 3 letter agencies to just walk in, and copy drives.
I doubt that they will be hosting the source code for their cracking tools or internal forums for their secret stuff. It is probably going to be just a blog of sorts that they can use as their official channel for news about their activity. Who cares of the govt takes the drives if it's all public info anyway? And do you really think they are going to host it in the U.S.A.?
This is not about Google not paying taxes on the food they provide. This is about Google giving free lunch to their employees, instead of the employees having to pay for their lunch. They are basically saying that if Google employees eat for free every day, they are getting a "bonus", in that they are not having to pay their own money for food. The govt thinks that the employees should have to pay tax on the free lunch, not Google.
If the *AA's begin to make the world suck too bad for Google, they could just purchase them and eradicate all of it.
You make it sound as if buying another company is as easy as buying a gallon of milk. Buying another company requires interest on both sides, as well as a lot of paperwork an politics to get it approved.
Also, Google is not in the business of making content. They don't actually produce any content on any of their sites. They simply index what other people have created, and make it available.
According to Yahoo finance, Google has 48 billion in cash.
Google could easily just buy the entire industry. Every single one of those companies. With cash. Several times over.
Universal was bought by Comcast, which has a market cap of 108 billion. Nice try.
Google is however doing nothing to prevent this usage, they are specifically targeting the usage of the word ungoogleable.
This is probably because they don't want anything to be ungoogleable. If something exists, but cannot be found in Google, then Google is not doing their job of making that thing searchable.
China most defiantly has the resources,... Start putting pressure on ISPs that allow their networks to be abused.
I'm pretty sure that China's government doesn't care about the amount of spam being generated from their networks because the target of the spam is not their citizens, but rather people in other countries.
You don't get to say they took shit away from you when you actively have to do something yourself to have the change effect you.
Not true. Both Chrome and Firefox do not support OSX Leopard (10.5) anymore, and I'm sure there are a lot of other software that do the same. When Apple stops supporting an OS, software makers also stop supporting it, so you lose out on getting the latest software updates.
Slashdot Mirror
I smell a new "No Teacher Left Behind" government project coming.
A store offering a subscription arrangement needs to search for upcoming expiration dates so that it can 1. notify each subscriber that the card on file with the store is about to expire and 2. charge the ETF on the last valid day if the subscriber fails to update the card by the expiration date.
Why do the expiration dates need to be encrypted? A thief can't do anything with just the expiration date without also knowing the CC number
This is true. Their website is https://sitereview.bluecoat.co....
Sometimes automated systems make mistakes, and when they do, they are corrected. Get over it and stop whining.
And by the way, all of the sites mentioned have been fixed.
The New Braunfels Republican Women (www.nbrw.com) > Political/Social Advocacy
Weston Community Children's Association (www.wccakids.org) > Charitable Organizations
Rotary Club of Midland, Ontario (www.clubrunner.ca) > Charitable Organizations
How do you run Windows programs?
The majority of the work that most employees do likely revolves around email or documents/spreadsheets/presentations, all of which have native OSX software.
For the few jobs that require software that only runs on Windows, there is always virtualization, or remote desktop into an MS terminal server.
"But it also raises the question of whether targeting anonymity services to hunt out fraudsters could have chilling effects for harmless Tor users trying to protect their privacy online"
Umm.. the user is ordering something using their name, credit card, and address. They are not going to use Tor to protect their anonymity.
That statement was not about normal people using TOR for online purchases. It was about people using TOR to hide their identity when doing things like posting to a controversial website, or whistleblowing. If this software catches on, and websites start using it to block TOR users, then it would make TOR less useful for posting anonymously.
But I didn't give them permission to log anything for such purposes.
I fully expect my government to not violate people's privacy and conduct surveillance on them to stop the evil bogeymen.
Then don't use the USPS. There are plenty of other mail transport services out there, that may or may not do this same tracking, and may or may not provide said tracking to the government upon request.
Security. Properly configured, a router with public-access Wi-Fi should not represent a security risk for those on the router's private and secure network. The technical reasons for this are a bit complicated; read an Open Wireless Movement explanation at openwireless.org.
Service degradation. Those using the slower public portion of a home router typically won't degrade performance on the faster private side. Future routers would speed up public access when the private side isn't being used and give the private network priority if required.
Legal liability. Those who fear being blamed for misuse of their public Wi-Fi signals are said to be protected under a "safe harbor" doctrine akin to that protecting Internet service providers. In other words, they're likely not liable for the mischief of porn purveyors or music pirates.
Freeloading. Fear of freeloaders is misplaced, the Open Wireless Movement believes. "Sharing capacity helps everyone," it says. "If you've ever been without Internet access and needed to check an email, you will remember how useful open networks can be in a pinch."
What does this solve? Your traffic still goes through the ISP router after it goes through your router. Your solution only solves one of the 3 questions asked by GP.
Sure, the game companies may not want this released, but does the FBI care? If they investigate, and find and arrest the hacker, it's up to the D.A. whether or not to prosecute, not the game companies. This seems like a worthless insurance policy/blackmail, because the people going after him are unaffected by the action of him releasing the encryption key.
Why should we encourage crime sprees? If I know I will only get charged with one instance of a crime, I'm going to rob a dozen 7-11s instead of one. You should not be rewarded for committing more crimes.
I don't think that is what is happening. You can certainly get charged with multiple charges of the same crime. It would be like if you robbed a dozen 7/11 stores in a dozen states, but they could only prove that you robbed one. You can either go to trial in 12 states, or take the plea bargain for just one robbery, and save yourself the 11 other trials.
If he has no money to fight his legal battles, he has no money to sue Google or anyone else.
I'm sure one of the many patent troll companies would be happy to foot the bill for the legal costs in return for a large chunk of the settlement if they win.
Also, what happens if the authentication servers go down? .
That is probably why they are building a 300,000 server farm to run it.
but but, it will be cheaper!?
It will if US companies skip the middleman (Infosys) and just use IPsoft themselves.
Then the question is why you aren't walking back with the groceries that you bought.
It was in the discussion about how much a person can carry. Do you want to walk home a quarter mile carrying 15 bags of groceries?
One is about your ego and broadcasting to an audience of other people who are all busy worrying about their ego and broadcasting to their audience
I'd say that both sites fit that description. LinkedIn has turned into the "Facebook for professionals". It seems like most people's goal on LinkedIn is to connect with as many people as they can to get their "network" as large as they can. I have gotten LinkedIn requests from people that I met at a conference several years ago, and talked to for 5 minutes.
LinkedIn used to be about creating a network of trusted colleagues, that you want to keep in touch with, so that you could get trusted introductions to people you didn't know. If I trust person A, and person A trusts person B, B trusts C; therefore if person C is looking for a job opportunity, then they have a good chance of being a reasonably good candidate. That whole concept seems to have gotten lost in the last few years, and now it is all about having as many connections as you can.
What we need is more televisions that have software built into them that can access all of the video networks directly. There are already DVD/Blu-Ray players that can play from Netflix/Amazon/Hulu/Youtube, etc.
But you can't be compelled to provide evidence against yourself that the government doesn't know you have.
What if the drive contains the evidence that they know you have, but it also contains other evidence that they do NOT know you have, which one would have precedence? If decrypting the drive will give them access to other evidence that would incriminate you in another crime.
The major issue I see with this plan, is most datacenters allow 3 letter agencies to just walk in, and copy drives.
I doubt that they will be hosting the source code for their cracking tools or internal forums for their secret stuff. It is probably going to be just a blog of sorts that they can use as their official channel for news about their activity. Who cares of the govt takes the drives if it's all public info anyway? And do you really think they are going to host it in the U.S.A.?
And Google is paying taxes on the lunch menu.
This is not about Google not paying taxes on the food they provide. This is about Google giving free lunch to their employees, instead of the employees having to pay for their lunch. They are basically saying that if Google employees eat for free every day, they are getting a "bonus", in that they are not having to pay their own money for food. The govt thinks that the employees should have to pay tax on the free lunch, not Google.
If the *AA's begin to make the world suck too bad for Google, they could just purchase them and eradicate all of it.
You make it sound as if buying another company is as easy as buying a gallon of milk. Buying another company requires interest on both sides, as well as a lot of paperwork an politics to get it approved.
Also, Google is not in the business of making content. They don't actually produce any content on any of their sites. They simply index what other people have created, and make it available.
According to Yahoo finance, Google has 48 billion in cash.
Google could easily just buy the entire industry. Every single one of those companies. With cash. Several times over.
Universal was bought by Comcast, which has a market cap of 108 billion. Nice try.
Google is however doing nothing to prevent this usage, they are specifically targeting the usage of the word ungoogleable.
This is probably because they don't want anything to be ungoogleable. If something exists, but cannot be found in Google, then Google is not doing their job of making that thing searchable.
I've upgraded to bmail.
China most defiantly has the resources, ... Start putting pressure on ISPs that allow their networks to be abused.
I'm pretty sure that China's government doesn't care about the amount of spam being generated from their networks because the target of the spam is not their citizens, but rather people in other countries.
You don't get to say they took shit away from you when you actively have to do something yourself to have the change effect you.
Not true. Both Chrome and Firefox do not support OSX Leopard (10.5) anymore, and I'm sure there are a lot of other software that do the same. When Apple stops supporting an OS, software makers also stop supporting it, so you lose out on getting the latest software updates.
I find it funny that they allow golf clubs, but a maximum of 2.