Are there any queers in the theater tonight? Get them up against the wall! There's one in the spotlight, he don't look right to me, Get him up against the wall! That one looks Jewish! And that one's a coon! Who let all of this riff-raff into the room? There's one smoking a joint, And another with spots! If I had my way, I'd have all of you shot!
If it was so likely to have passed on its own (its original method of submission) then please tell me why it was deemed necessary to tack it onto a military spending bill?
Occam had this razor...it comes in handy in situations like these.
Now it will for sure.
<sarcasm> It certainly will...no need to worry about any of that 'due process' malarkey. </sarcasm>
And antivirus programs don't protect against unknown viruses
Um...yes, they do (to a point). Read up on heuristics.
I see no reason in principle why heuristics couldn't detect that a browser add-in logs keystrokes and/or communicates with a third-party server, and why byte-matching couldn't detect the same malware routine compiled into all kinds of applications.
Well, internal inconsistencies aside, it sounds like you have a plan. Get busy, and let me know how that turns out.
With the exception of RFID, how in the living hell would you not know you're "giving your information away"?
The Department of Homeland Security is already pushing RFID. FTA:
In the past, Homeland Security has indicated it likes the concept of RFID chips.
The House *already approved* a standalone version of the Real ID bill, so the fact this is attached to military spending is irrelevant
I think you missed the point there...the point isn't that the House passed the bill, but that the Senate wasn't expected to. Thus, the attachment of this bill to military spending is entirely relevant, since its chances on its own were poor.
Unfortunately, that's why they attached this thing to an Iraq spending bill...so they could ram it through Congress without actually having to debate the issues...on its own, it was expected to have trouble in the Senate.
Attached to an Iraq spending bill, it will have no trouble passing, and our esteemed President has already expressed his support.
This bill will impose costs on states (driver's licenses)without proper reimbursement, so there's a fighting point right there, but I don't realistically see this being stopped. Instead, it might be better to start thinking about how we might benefit from the imposition of this new technology.
The Real ID Act says federally accepted ID cards must be "machine readable," and lets Homeland Security determine the details. That could end up being a magnetic strip, enhanced bar code, or radio frequency identification (RFID) chips.
In the past, Homeland Security has indicated it likes the concept of RFID chips. The State Department is already going to be embedding RFID devices in passports, and Homeland Security wants to issue RFID-outfitted IDs to foreign visitors who enter the country at the Mexican and Canadian borders. The agency plans to start a yearlong test of the technology in July at checkpoints in Arizona, New York and Washington state.
Looks like devices like these are going to become very popular very soon...
Also, devices like these could be used to really complicate the lives of people you dislike...
Thanks for the link...I ws trying to find corroboration myself, but was unable to.
As to it being a good day, I suppose so.....about as good as when Coca-Cola announced Coke Classic after the universally-reviled New Formula (yes, I'm dating myself here).
Actually, the similarities are a bit eerie, don't you think?
Here's the full text of the email (with the spacing errors corrected).
Microsoft's principles for public policy engagement
During the past two weeks I've heard from many of you with a wide range of views on the recent anti-discrimination bill in Washington State, and the larger issue of what is the appropriate role of a public corporation in public policy discussions. This input has reminded me again of what makes our company unique and why I care about it so much.
One point really stood out in all the emails you sent me. Regardless of where people came down on the issues, everyone expressed strong support for the company's commitment to diversity. To me, that's so critical. Our success depends on having a workforce that is as diverse as our customers - and on working together in a way that taps all of that diversity.
I don't want to rehash the events that resulted in Microsoft taking a neutral position on the anti-discrimination bill in Washington State. There was a lot of confusion and miscommunication, and we are taking steps to improve our processes going forward.
To me, this situation underscores the importance of having clearly-defined principles on which we base our actions. It all boils down to trust. Even when people disagree with something that we do, they need to have confidence that we based our action on thoughtful principles, because that is how we run our business.
I said in my April 22 email that we were wrestling with the question of how and when the company should engage on issues that go beyond the software industry. After thinking about this for the past two weeks, I want to share my decision with you and lay out the principles that will guide us going forward.
First and foremost, we will continue to focus our public policy activities on issues that most directly affect our business, such as Internet safety, intellectual property rights, free trade, digital inclusion and a healthy business climate.
After looking at the question from all sides, I've concluded that diversity in the workplace is such an important issue for our business that it should be included in our legislative agenda. Since our beginning nearly 30 years ago, Microsoft has had a strong business interest in recruiting and retaining the best and brightest and most diverse workforce possible. I'm proud of Microsoft's commitment to non-discrimination in our internal policies and benefits, but our policies can't cover the range of housing, education, financial and similar services that our people and their partners and families need. Therefore, it's appropriate for the company to support legislation that will promote and protect diversity in the workplace.
Accordingly, Microsoft will continue to join other leading companies in supporting federal legislation that would prohibit employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation -adding sexual orientation to the existing law that already covers race, sex, national origin, religion, age and disability. Given the importance of diversity to our business, it is appropriate for the company to endorse legislation that prohibits employment discrimination on all of these grounds. Obviously, the Washington State legislative session has concluded for this year, but if legislation similar to HB 1515 is introduced in future sessions, we will support it.
I also want to be clear about some limits to this approach. Many other countries have different political traditions for public advocacy by corporations, and I'm not prepared to involve the company in debates outside the US in such circumstances. And, based on the principles I've just outlined, the company should not and will not take a position on most other public policy issues, either in the US or internationally.
I respect that there will be different viewpoints. But as CEO, I am doing what I believe is right for our company as a whole.
This situation has also made me stop and think about h
My my...how simple you make it sound...perhaps you ought to write an anti-malware app that works, and get rich.
No? Mabye because of your use of the qualifier known. New malware is written every day, genius, just like new viruses. Unlike new viruses, which can be caught with heuristics (sometimes), malware is much more complex,and commonly masquarades as legitimate programs. Heck....sometimes they are legitimate programs.
In short, the sitution is far more complex than your overly simplistic one-sentence statement purports it to be. But thanks for playing, though...
1.) Place bread (or bagel, or english muffin) on top rear of system (just above power supply). 2.) Insert foreign object into power supply fan opening until fan noise stops. 3.) Wait until bread is toasted adequately. 4.) Turn over and toast other side to same degree of preferred toastiness.
(Toasters of bagels or english muffins may omit this step.) 5.) IMPORTANT! Remove foreign object from power supply fan opening, verify proper operation of fan. 6.) Enjoy hot toasty goodness!
Maniacal raving flames aside, I'll be the first to agree with you. As an I.T. guy (not former), I readily admit that the piss-poor state of M$ operating systems keep food on my table.
The virus-developing nerds aren't actually Russian...the whole 'Russian hax0rz are so 1337' thing is propaganda disseminated by Symatec and other 'anti-virus' companies.
And that's the whole point right there. An integral part of malware protection has always been user education. All those warnings that Ad-Watch and ZoneAlarm are throwing at you don't mean diddly if the user just shrugs and clicks 'allow'.
It sounds like Symantec is saying they're working toward a model requiring less user interaction/education. I'll believe it when I see it.
Just how effective is anti-spyware software made by anti-virus companies, anyway? It seems to me that 'malware' (spyware, adware, etc.) is much more sophisticated than their viral counterparts, especially when they enlist user interaction as part of their process. After all, all a user need do is click on a link, open an attachment, look an an email or a webpage, etc., and they have implicitly given their permission for this malware to do its thing. The only way for software to protect you against such things is to either warn you that what you are doing may be dangerous (most users just click past that anyway) or flat-out stop the user from doing certain things, which reduces utility. It seems to me that any attempt to tackle the malware problem from a viral viewpoint is doomed to fail. Our company recently installed the McAfee anti-spyware add-on to our corporate anti-virus solution. My recommendation: don't waste your money...it's worthless.
Unfortunately, you are not the only one. A significant percentage of the population were unaffected by the memory-erasing ray broadcast during the popular sitcom 'Friends'.
Please report to your nearest government office for reeducation.
In December 1999 NASA's Mars Polar Lander (MPL) was supposed to touch down near the red planet's south pole. But shortly after it entered the Martian atmosphere, the spacecraft disappeared without a trace. Only now, 5½ years later, do scientists think they may have finally located the lander's wreckage and confirmed what went wrong with the mission. The full report, by planetary scientist Michael C. Malin (Malin Space Science Systems), appears in the July 2005 issue of Sky & Telescope, now in press.
Malin used his company's Mars Orbiter Camera (MOC) aboard NASA's Mars Global Surveyor to search for the missing spacecraft in late 1999 and early 2000, but apparently came up empty. Shortly thereafter, a review board looking into the craft's disappearance reported what might have caused Mars Polar Lander's demise. The board suggested that MPL's landing rockets fired at the right time and altitude but cut off prematurely. They were suppose to continue firing until one of the craft's landing legs touched the surface. Apparently the onboard software mistook the jolt of landing-leg deployment for ground contact and shut down the engines, causing MPL to fall from a presumed height of 40 meters (130 feet).
Using information gained from observing the two Mars Exploration Rover landers last year, Malin reexamined the 1999 and 2000 images looking for similar features. This time he identified what looks to be a parachute located several hundred meters away from a disturbed bit of ground with a large mark in its center. The parachute-like feature closely matches the Mars Exploration Rover parachutes (which were made of the same materials), and Malin believes the disturbed ground matches what one would see if a rocket had blasted the surface from a height of tens of meters.
"It seems that the MPL investigation board may have been correct," writes Malin in Sky & Telescope. "MPL's descent proceeded more or less successfully through atmospheric entry and parachute jettison. It was only a few short moments before touchdown that disaster struck."
Later this year NASA will direct Mars Global Surveyor to reexamine the MPL crash site using a special technique to improve the camera's resolution to 0.5 meter per pixel. Malin hopes the new observations will provide the conclusive evidence needed to officially close the case of the missing Mars Polar Lander.
Today the Council disclosed the news that the repulsive beings inhabiting the blue planet third from our star have located the wreckage of one of their invading spacecraft near our planet's southern pole.
Strangely enough, their newscasts mentioned nothing of the warning plaque errected alongside the downed invader. Some scientists theorize that the translation of our warning into their bestial language was imperfect, while others maintain that the plaque is simply too small to be imaged properly with their feeble, childish astronomical instruments.
K'Breel, speaker for the Council, voiced another, more pesimistic theory:
"Certainly, beings who are capable of constructing and sending such fiendishly clever little devices to spy on our world are more than capable of receiving and understanding our warning. They have simply chosen to disregard it. Clearly we can no longer ignore the predaceous advances of the evil blue planet. The Council has given the final authorization to divert our asteroid into a collision course. We now need only wait."
My sentiments exactly...I picked up most of the information in the first 8 chapters of this book by installing Firefox and playing around with it for about 30 minutes. I suppose I could do the same for Thunderbird as well, if I didn't use web-based email exclusively.
Slashdot Mirror
Whoever modded the parent 'Flamebait' obviously didn't bother to read pst the first three lines.
<sarcasm>
Tip to flamers: Make the first three lines of your post non-inflammatory...past that, you can be as much of a bitch as you want.
</sarcasm>
Excerpt from Pink Floyd's In the Flesh:
No, you don't exist.
Therfore, you could not have posted on this forum.
Therefore, I could not respond to your post.
However, I am responding to your post...but you don't exist...can't post...no response....aaaaargh....paradoxheadache...
I take exception to that.
Or mabye I don't.
Once, I taped 30 minutes of the theme from the old classic game M.U.L.E.and played it in the cassete deck in my car for a week.
And it still likely would have passed.
If it was so likely to have passed on its own (its original method of submission) then please tell me why it was deemed necessary to tack it onto a military spending bill?
Occam had this razor...it comes in handy in situations like these.
Now it will for sure.
<sarcasm>
It certainly will...no need to worry about any of that 'due process' malarkey.
</sarcasm>
And antivirus programs don't protect against unknown viruses
Um...yes, they do (to a point). Read up on heuristics.
I see no reason in principle why heuristics couldn't detect that a browser add-in logs keystrokes and/or communicates with a third-party server, and why byte-matching couldn't detect the same malware routine compiled into all kinds of applications.
Well, internal inconsistencies aside, it sounds like you have a plan. Get busy, and let me know how that turns out.
I agree with you completely, with the exception of the 'shocking' part.
I bef of you.
How dare you bef of me!!!
Heh heh...Ok, seriously,
With the exception of RFID, how in the living hell would you not know you're "giving your information away"?
The Department of Homeland Security is already pushing RFID. FTA:
The House *already approved* a standalone version of the Real ID bill, so the fact this is attached to military spending is irrelevant
I think you missed the point there...the point isn't that the House passed the bill, but that the Senate wasn't expected to. Thus, the attachment of this bill to military spending is entirely relevant, since its chances on its own were poor.
Unfortunately, that's why they attached this thing to an Iraq spending bill...so they could ram it through Congress without actually having to debate the issues...on its own, it was expected to have trouble in the Senate.
Attached to an Iraq spending bill, it will have no trouble passing, and our esteemed President has already expressed his support.
This bill will impose costs on states (driver's licenses)without proper reimbursement, so there's a fighting point right there, but I don't realistically see this being stopped. Instead, it might be better to start thinking about how we might benefit from the imposition of this new technology.
From TFA:
Looks like devices like these are going to become very popular very soon...
Also, devices like these could be used to really complicate the lives of people you dislike...
Thanks for the link...I ws trying to find corroboration myself, but was unable to.
As to it being a good day, I suppose so.....about as good as when Coca-Cola announced Coke Classic after the universally-reviled New Formula (yes, I'm dating myself here).
Actually, the similarities are a bit eerie, don't you think?
Here's the full text of the email (with the spacing errors corrected).
My my...how simple you make it sound...perhaps you ought to write an anti-malware app that works, and get rich.
No? Mabye because of your use of the qualifier known. New malware is written every day, genius, just like new viruses. Unlike new viruses, which can be caught with heuristics (sometimes), malware is much more complex,and commonly masquarades as legitimate programs. Heck....sometimes they are legitimate programs.
In short, the sitution is far more complex than your overly simplistic one-sentence statement purports it to be. But thanks for playing, though...
Yup...just follow this simple guide:
Wow...that was fun...
Maniacal raving flames aside, I'll be the first to agree with you. As an I.T. guy (not former), I readily admit that the piss-poor state of M$ operating systems keep food on my table.
I LOVE spyware...spyware alone pays my mortgage.
<tinfoilhat>
The virus-developing nerds aren't actually Russian...the whole 'Russian hax0rz are so 1337' thing is propaganda disseminated by Symatec and other 'anti-virus' companies.
</tinfoilhat>
And that's the whole point right there. An integral part of malware protection has always been user education. All those warnings that Ad-Watch and ZoneAlarm are throwing at you don't mean diddly if the user just shrugs and clicks 'allow'.
It sounds like Symantec is saying they're working toward a model requiring less user interaction/education. I'll believe it when I see it.
Just how effective is anti-spyware software made by anti-virus companies, anyway? It seems to me that 'malware' (spyware, adware, etc.) is much more sophisticated than their viral counterparts, especially when they enlist user interaction as part of their process. After all, all a user need do is click on a link, open an attachment, look an an email or a webpage, etc., and they have implicitly given their permission for this malware to do its thing. The only way for software to protect you against such things is to either warn you that what you are doing may be dangerous (most users just click past that anyway) or flat-out stop the user from doing certain things, which reduces utility. It seems to me that any attempt to tackle the malware problem from a viral viewpoint is doomed to fail. Our company recently installed the McAfee anti-spyware add-on to our corporate anti-virus solution. My recommendation: don't waste your money...it's worthless.
Unfortunately, you are not the only one. A significant percentage of the population were unaffected by the memory-erasing ray broadcast during the popular sitcom 'Friends'.
Please report to your nearest government office for reeducation.
Here's the text of the article:
Today the Council disclosed the news that the repulsive beings inhabiting the blue planet third from our star have located the wreckage of one of their invading spacecraft near our planet's southern pole.
Strangely enough, their newscasts mentioned nothing of the warning plaque errected alongside the downed invader.
Some scientists theorize that the translation of our warning into their bestial language was imperfect, while others maintain that the plaque is simply too small to be imaged properly with their feeble, childish astronomical instruments.
K'Breel, speaker for the Council, voiced another, more pesimistic theory:
Not that 'No, but I do anniversaries.' is any less nonsensical, though...
Log off before you hurt yourself.
Moron.
My sentiments exactly...I picked up most of the information in the first 8 chapters of this book by installing Firefox and playing around with it for about 30 minutes. I suppose I could do the same for Thunderbird as well, if I didn't use web-based email exclusively.