Gotta kill a few people. Then you got to get sent to a slam, where they tell you you'll never see daylight again. You dig up a doctor, and you pay him 20 menthol Kools to do a surgical shine job on your eyeballs.
Nice, so they're running their mission critical operations on reserve systems. Hope nothing too important happens while they're getting bombed by a/. post.
>> It is entirely Sony's responsibility. > Fixed that for you.
You fixed nothing. It was a known security exploit that Sony chose to ignore. That's fault, not responsibility.
> Hmm... By extension, you trusted the bank's security standards before putting your valuables into their vault. Why, then, is it not your fault that the valuables were stolen?
Lol, my fault for trusting the bank vault? Must be my parents' fault. The genes they passed to me and my upbringing clearly brought me to the poorly drawn conclusion of trusting bank vaults. I'm sorry, but your argument ultimately slides into absurdity. Most reasonable people would expect their goods to be completely safe in a bank vault. That conclusion isn't flawed.
> Since it's a statistical inevitability that they'd get hacked, why are you conflating "defensive actions" with "remediation actions"? You say "secure their shit" - but that's a defensive action, not a remediation one. What are your specific complaints about their remediation?
Yes, statistical inevitability because they didn't close known security flaws. Now it's too late. It's like preventive vs reactive health care. Sony is reacting when they should have been preventing.
It is entirely Sony's fault. Once a company has decided to protect my personal property and fails to do so, it's that company's fault. Completely. If I put valuables in a bank vault and the bank gets broken into I blame the bank, not the thief. Thievery like this isn't random, it's a statistical inevitability that Sony didn't prepare for. They were happy taking the money of the people using their service and didn't uphold their end of the bargain: secure their $#!+.
Surprised @ the/. crowd on this one. First off, the missing router is utterly meaningless.
1) Lied to police 2) Used Google maps to search for the location where his wife's body was found. 3) Earlier called himself to "find his phone", but ended up leaving a 23 second message. When I look for my phone I call it and hang up well before it leaves a message. I think most people do the same. He was testing his alibi-to-be. 4) Told police he doesn't know cellphones. He's a VoIP expert, lol. 5) Shoes he wore to kill her vanished?
I think the jury will crucify him for #2 alone. The guy obviously tried to cover his tracks but did a piss-poor job. The circumstantial in this case has teeth. Poor Brad Cooper, guess there will be no Hangover 3.
Whoever mentioned ReiserFS somewhere up there is a funny, funny man.
Lawyers inform their clients of the legal options available to them. Lawyers may file and try the case but I assure you the decision to do so rests with Apple (aka: Steve Jobs).
"Complaints I can handle. What I can't handle is your customers' inexplicable knowledge of Insuricare's inner workings. They're experts! Experts, Bob! Exploiting every loophole! Dodging every obstacle! They're penetrating the bureaucracy!"
The big threat to Apple's dominance in the cellphone market isn't from a single competitor. Nexus One is receiving a lot of hype because of the Google tag. A few months ago Verizon generated its own hype with bold commercials for the Droid (which, for disclosure reasons, I will mention I bought and am happy with). The real story and threat to Apple is from the Android operating system, not Google directly. The N1 story actually seems closer to Zune than anything else: powerful software company attempts to break into hardware oriented sector and appears ill-prepared.
In the case of Apple the enemy of their enemy is not their friend. For a M$/Apple partnership to make any sense at all M$ would have to be throwing in the towel with Windows Mobile. Instead, it looks like the opposite will hold true. The smartphone market is just like the 80's and Google has taken huge steps to ensure themselves a tenable position in the brawl that is about to occur.
Most/.ers should be damn happy about the current climate. Google pretty much is sneaking the Linux OS through the back door w/o the general populace even understanding it (and the only way they'll ever switch to it). When phones become dockable portable computers it might very well be Linux the world is running on.
I was watching the Discovery channel awhile ago (probably close to a year, if not more) and saw something that may have related to this research. The scientists began by giving the monkeys a joystick (or mouse, memory is hazy) and when the monkeys moved the cursor to a box on the screen they would receive a treat. Then they took away the control and wired the monkey's brain so that (s)he could simply use thought to control the cursor on the screen. Apparently this was done by thinking of the same movements that the monkey would do to maneuver the cursor but not actually physically performing the action.
I'm kind of curious if this current robotic arm is an extention (no pun intended) of that research or completely unrelated.
Slashdot Mirror
Gotta kill a few people. Then you got to get sent to a slam, where they tell you you'll never see daylight again. You dig up a doctor, and you pay him 20 menthol Kools to do a surgical shine job on your eyeballs.
Or here, use these eye drops.
Yeah, that sounds about right.
Nice, so they're running their mission critical operations on reserve systems. Hope nothing too important happens while they're getting bombed by a /. post.
Is this a + or - 1 to the Jobless rate?
>> It is entirely Sony's responsibility.
> Fixed that for you.
You fixed nothing. It was a known security exploit that Sony chose to ignore. That's fault, not responsibility.
> Hmm... By extension, you trusted the bank's security standards before putting your valuables into their vault. Why, then, is it not your fault that the valuables were stolen?
Lol, my fault for trusting the bank vault? Must be my parents' fault. The genes they passed to me and my upbringing clearly brought me to the poorly drawn conclusion of trusting bank vaults. I'm sorry, but your argument ultimately slides into absurdity. Most reasonable people would expect their goods to be completely safe in a bank vault. That conclusion isn't flawed.
> Since it's a statistical inevitability that they'd get hacked, why are you conflating "defensive actions" with "remediation actions"? You say "secure their shit" - but that's a defensive action, not a remediation one. What are your specific complaints about their remediation?
Yes, statistical inevitability because they didn't close known security flaws. Now it's too late. It's like preventive vs reactive health care. Sony is reacting when they should have been preventing.
It is entirely Sony's fault. Once a company has decided to protect my personal property and fails to do so, it's that company's fault. Completely. If I put valuables in a bank vault and the bank gets broken into I blame the bank, not the thief. Thievery like this isn't random, it's a statistical inevitability that Sony didn't prepare for. They were happy taking the money of the people using their service and didn't uphold their end of the bargain: secure their $#!+.
Surprised @ the /. crowd on this one. First off, the missing router is utterly meaningless.
1) Lied to police
2) Used Google maps to search for the location where his wife's body was found.
3) Earlier called himself to "find his phone", but ended up leaving a 23 second message. When I look for my phone I call it and hang up well before it leaves a message. I think most people do the same. He was testing his alibi-to-be.
4) Told police he doesn't know cellphones. He's a VoIP expert, lol.
5) Shoes he wore to kill her vanished?
I think the jury will crucify him for #2 alone. The guy obviously tried to cover his tracks but did a piss-poor job. The circumstantial in this case has teeth. Poor Brad Cooper, guess there will be no Hangover 3.
Whoever mentioned ReiserFS somewhere up there is a funny, funny man.
I found the $13,000 in funding a letdown as the synopsis led me to believe the whole thing was a more home grown affair.
-Stephen Colbert
Lawyers inform their clients of the legal options available to them. Lawyers may file and try the case but I assure you the decision to do so rests with Apple (aka: Steve Jobs).
"Complaints I can handle. What I can't handle is your customers' inexplicable knowledge of Insuricare's inner workings. They're experts! Experts, Bob! Exploiting every loophole! Dodging every obstacle! They're penetrating the bureaucracy!"
The big threat to Apple's dominance in the cellphone market isn't from a single competitor. Nexus One is receiving a lot of hype because of the Google tag. A few months ago Verizon generated its own hype with bold commercials for the Droid (which, for disclosure reasons, I will mention I bought and am happy with). The real story and threat to Apple is from the Android operating system, not Google directly. The N1 story actually seems closer to Zune than anything else: powerful software company attempts to break into hardware oriented sector and appears ill-prepared.
In the case of Apple the enemy of their enemy is not their friend. For a M$/Apple partnership to make any sense at all M$ would have to be throwing in the towel with Windows Mobile. Instead, it looks like the opposite will hold true. The smartphone market is just like the 80's and Google has taken huge steps to ensure themselves a tenable position in the brawl that is about to occur.
Most /.ers should be damn happy about the current climate. Google pretty much is sneaking the Linux OS through the back door w/o the general populace even understanding it (and the only way they'll ever switch to it). When phones become dockable portable computers it might very well be Linux the world is running on.
I was watching the Discovery channel awhile ago (probably close to a year, if not more) and saw something that may have related to this research. The scientists began by giving the monkeys a joystick (or mouse, memory is hazy) and when the monkeys moved the cursor to a box on the screen they would receive a treat. Then they took away the control and wired the monkey's brain so that (s)he could simply use thought to control the cursor on the screen. Apparently this was done by thinking of the same movements that the monkey would do to maneuver the cursor but not actually physically performing the action. I'm kind of curious if this current robotic arm is an extention (no pun intended) of that research or completely unrelated.