Ha! He sure walked into that one because I saw your setup a mile away. I thought the same thing. Some people can eat crap food their whole life and not gain an ounce and they would be penalized too.
This whole discussion aside, it's just a money grab by politicians. They should be shot and the fat people can feast on them instead. . . . Win Win
You sure are reading a lot into this hire aren't you? Not that OS X is invulnerable, I don't believe that, but your assertion that because they hired someone for OS security they obviously recongnize the Mac is full of security holes is a stretch, isn't it? Maybe they want to assure themselves that it doesn't BECOME exploited?
Nobody denied that there are vulnerabilities. I have never seen anyone deny that. What is in contention is that the Mac is swiss cheese like some FUD-meisters seem to state. Right now there is no malware aside from Trojans (that I am aware of) and if the Mac is as wide open as they say there should be SOMETHING, but there's not. I don't think Macs are invulnerable, but right now they are the safer proposition.
"I've seen OSX exploits that didn't require any more interaction from a user than those aimed at windows in farm environments;"
- I call shenanigans on that statement. You've somehow seen them, but the rest of the world is unaware of them? Serve up some facts and proof or stop wasting my time.
Yes, in retrospect maybe you could say that in a perverse sort of way. But then again maybe he never anticipated being abused by REI, Loomis and the police? It's not like this severe over-reaction was something an ordinary person would foresee, nor being told he'd be tackled if he try to leave. Seems to me that he did nothing wrong, broke no laws, and got bullied anyway. How is that justifiable?
I'm confused. They said it did not happen and then they said the facts were innacurate? How can it be both. If it didnt' happen then it didn't happen. If it did happen THEN the facts presented could be wrong. Sounds like doublespeak to me. Cops protect their own. Even if it happened exactly they way the blog said they cops will get off scott-free and the department will protect them even though if they violated the man's civil rights.
- Then get a new job if they don't like it. The fact is most of them get off on the power of the job, so I don't feel sorry for them. It's a voluntary choice, they weren't drafted.
I disagree. Everyone hates lawyers, even when they need one. They hate them for litigating everything they can find so they can be wealthy. They hate them for serving them the complaint in the first place. They hate having to use them to defend against a complaint filed by anther lawyer. They hate them for the chronic overbilling that seems to be the norm. I could go on, but you get the idea. A world without lawyers would be a nice start.
Wow, your post seems to lack any insightfullness at all. First, a Masters might help in today's work environment. A bachelors seems to be the equivalent of a 2 year degree any more and more people are getting Masters. Simply having a bachelors doesn't mean you are any less capable, but you will definitely be competing against a LOT of people with Masters degrees in today's work environment. That being said, you can get the bachelors, get a job for experience (and to start paying off your school), and complete your Masters on the side (while hopefully having your employer pay for it).
Second, a Masters is not a degree that will get you anywhere as an academic. It's PhD or bust as a general rule.
Third, the iPhone rocks and is the best phone on the market today!
"I'd bet that the percentage of people who buy an iPhone and then games is a lot lower than those who buy a DS and then games. "
- I'd bet the percentages are the same, 100%. Everyone I know who has an iPhone has games on it. Not only that, the games are free or AFFORDABLE. While not everyone who buys an iPhone buys games I'd bet the number 90%+, and considering how many iPhones are out there and how that number is climbing I don't see how Apple can't surpass the DS easily.
Luckily he's not an actor any more, he's a Governor. It should only be a few more years now until the Schwarzenegger Prophecy (from the movie Demolition Man) comes true and Arnold is President. Lucky for me I LOVE Taco Bell, and will adapt to the new reality easily.
I agree. Those are the two rallying cries that seem to induce most of the population to just say "Okay" and hand over their right to privacy to their government overlords who are "protecting" them (or the children of course!). I'm sure these networks are used by some who have something to hide, but making them suspect or illegal because of that is ridiculous. Not that it will stop the government from trying.
Whoa! You are like the Dalai Lama or something! Your calm, reasoned argument that the world will not end if it gets warmer is like a breath of fresh (albeit warm) air!
Too bad more people couldn't see the points you made in your post.
1. Global warming is not necessarily bad. 2. We can adapt. 3. It's been warmer than this before. 4. We still need to clean up our act. 5. The sky is NOT falling.
I'd like to shake your hand but we'd better do it quickly because you are about to get burned at the stake by the AGW Cult. Hope you wear Nomex underwear!
If you're trying to make the case for security through obscurity then that is a bit of an oversimplification. It obviously plays a part, but previous versions of the Mac operating system (pre-OS X) had viruses, FAR lower market share, and FAR less internet connectivity. While security through obscurity definitely has a role in this, I would say the the OS security also plays a role too. Security through obscurity seems too much of a simplification, and a convenient one for Mac haters.
When I say Macs are better I am talking about the overall experience, and I would say that is what most users (technical and non-technical) mean when they say that. I am a technical user, but I had to waste time when I used Windows machines on administering the machine (anti-virus subscriptions or install, anti-spyware, clogged registry over time, etc.). I don't spend time on that any more. I just use the machine to do work, play, create movies, etc. and it's so well thought out, integrated, and easy to use that you just have to focus on the vision of your work, not on figuring out how to make it happen. That's a bit of an oversimplification, but that's the gist of it.
I guess my experience has been that most Mac detractors that focus simply on price or technical specs, etc. are not "getting it". I used to be that way when I used Windows for 15 years. Then, on good advice from some knowledgeable relatives, I got a Mac in '04 for a video production company I was starting, and within 2 weeks I was hooked. If someone has never used a Mac as their main machine for any time then I don't expect them to "get it" because I'm not sure I can even describe in measurable detail what is better. All I know is I enjoy my Mac more than any Windows machine I've ever bought, built, etc. and it has turned me into a blathering pro-Mac advocate (as you can obviously see). I can't remember the last time I bought any product I was so pleased with, and THAT is why Mac users are so vocal, happy about their purchase, and claim they are better.
I don't know who started this BS about Mac users buy Macs because they want to feel different or special, but those who repeat it are idiots. I know lots of Mac users and have conversed with lots of Mac users online and NONE of them have had a superiority complex. Now Linux users (maybe justifiably) and Windows users (definitely not justifiable) seem to have the bigger egos from what I've seen. From what I've seen Mac users are so vocal not because they think they are special, but because they get tired of seeing lies written about the Mac from uninformed fools who've never used one. Your idiotic perpetuation of the snooty Mac user shows you don't understand why people choose to buy Macs.
"Like any other UNIX OS, OSX is less vulnerable to such attacks than Windows,"
- From a trojan? No. All are equally susceptible.
"I suspect that this botnet has been created by a geek that is sick to death of uneducated Mac fanboyism, and in a small way, I have respect for that."
- I suspect (based on my correction of you above) that you don't understand that a trojan can be installed on any computer because it is granted permission by the user. Your attempt to sneer as you look down on Mac users comes across as stupidity when you don't even seem to comprehend what you're talking about.
"never had to reformat except when I rebuilt the whole computer?"
Soooo, you DID have to reformat when you rebuilt the whole computer. . . Why the hell else would you reformat?
You should listen to your family. They know what they're talking about, and they didn't base their decision on price (what fool does that?). If everything else is equal then price should be a major factor, but all else is NOT equal in the comparison. OS X is better and Macs are better. If you're happy with your Yugo computer then by all means stick with it, but if you want to experience a well integrated, rock solid experience with NO viruses then try a Mac.
You Godwin's Rule Nazi!!
On an unrelated note. ... why are the Slashdot Nazi's timing when I hit reply versus when I hit submit? WTF business is it of theirs how long it takes me to write my comment? That sounds like something Hitler would do!!!
Sorry, couldn't resist. On the flip side, I am hereby inventing Brian's Rule which states, "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of someone ranting about Godwin's Rule approaches 1."
Are you telling me the ice age scare was a media phenomenon? But of course global warming (not relabled climate change because the initial label was no longer accurate) could NOT be the same media phenomenon? Looks like you're choosing to only accept the evidence that support the argument you want to believe, doesn't it?
I for one think this is all another media induced snowball supported by FLIMSY and narrowly viewed evidence. The pro-AGW theory has spawned cult-like behavior that allows no dissent, and to me that usually means that there's something wrong with the theory.
Slashdot Mirror
Ha! He sure walked into that one because I saw your setup a mile away. I thought the same thing. Some people can eat crap food their whole life and not gain an ounce and they would be penalized too.
This whole discussion aside, it's just a money grab by politicians. They should be shot and the fat people can feast on them instead. . . . Win Win
You sure are reading a lot into this hire aren't you? Not that OS X is invulnerable, I don't believe that, but your assertion that because they hired someone for OS security they obviously recongnize the Mac is full of security holes is a stretch, isn't it? Maybe they want to assure themselves that it doesn't BECOME exploited?
Nobody denied that there are vulnerabilities. I have never seen anyone deny that. What is in contention is that the Mac is swiss cheese like some FUD-meisters seem to state. Right now there is no malware aside from Trojans (that I am aware of) and if the Mac is as wide open as they say there should be SOMETHING, but there's not. I don't think Macs are invulnerable, but right now they are the safer proposition.
"I've seen OSX exploits that didn't require any more interaction from a user than those aimed at windows in farm environments;"
- I call shenanigans on that statement. You've somehow seen them, but the rest of the world is unaware of them? Serve up some facts and proof or stop wasting my time.
Was there a bank involved in this that I didn't read about in the article? It was an ATM at REI! . . . Try and stay on topic.
Yes, in retrospect maybe you could say that in a perverse sort of way. But then again maybe he never anticipated being abused by REI, Loomis and the police? It's not like this severe over-reaction was something an ordinary person would foresee, nor being told he'd be tackled if he try to leave. Seems to me that he did nothing wrong, broke no laws, and got bullied anyway. How is that justifiable?
I'm confused. They said it did not happen and then they said the facts were innacurate? How can it be both. If it didnt' happen then it didn't happen. If it did happen THEN the facts presented could be wrong. Sounds like doublespeak to me. Cops protect their own. Even if it happened exactly they way the blog said they cops will get off scott-free and the department will protect them even though if they violated the man's civil rights.
"their job sucks for the most part."
- Then get a new job if they don't like it. The fact is most of them get off on the power of the job, so I don't feel sorry for them. It's a voluntary choice, they weren't drafted.
I disagree. Everyone hates lawyers, even when they need one. They hate them for litigating everything they can find so they can be wealthy. They hate them for serving them the complaint in the first place. They hate having to use them to defend against a complaint filed by anther lawyer. They hate them for the chronic overbilling that seems to be the norm. I could go on, but you get the idea. A world without lawyers would be a nice start.
Probably fewer? The iPhone has over 40,000 apps available now and still climbing quickly. Does Android have even 10% of that?
Wow, your post seems to lack any insightfullness at all. First, a Masters might help in today's work environment. A bachelors seems to be the equivalent of a 2 year degree any more and more people are getting Masters. Simply having a bachelors doesn't mean you are any less capable, but you will definitely be competing against a LOT of people with Masters degrees in today's work environment. That being said, you can get the bachelors, get a job for experience (and to start paying off your school), and complete your Masters on the side (while hopefully having your employer pay for it).
Second, a Masters is not a degree that will get you anywhere as an academic. It's PhD or bust as a general rule.
Third, the iPhone rocks and is the best phone on the market today!
"I'd bet that the percentage of people who buy an iPhone and then games is a lot lower than those who buy a DS and then games. "
- I'd bet the percentages are the same, 100%. Everyone I know who has an iPhone has games on it. Not only that, the games are free or AFFORDABLE. While not everyone who buys an iPhone buys games I'd bet the number 90%+, and considering how many iPhones are out there and how that number is climbing I don't see how Apple can't surpass the DS easily.
Luckily he's not an actor any more, he's a Governor. It should only be a few more years now until the Schwarzenegger Prophecy (from the movie Demolition Man) comes true and Arnold is President. Lucky for me I LOVE Taco Bell, and will adapt to the new reality easily.
Joy Joy thoughts to all!
I agree. Those are the two rallying cries that seem to induce most of the population to just say "Okay" and hand over their right to privacy to their government overlords who are "protecting" them (or the children of course!). I'm sure these networks are used by some who have something to hide, but making them suspect or illegal because of that is ridiculous. Not that it will stop the government from trying.
Whoa! You are like the Dalai Lama or something! Your calm, reasoned argument that the world will not end if it gets warmer is like a breath of fresh (albeit warm) air!
Too bad more people couldn't see the points you made in your post.
1. Global warming is not necessarily bad.
2. We can adapt.
3. It's been warmer than this before.
4. We still need to clean up our act.
5. The sky is NOT falling.
I'd like to shake your hand but we'd better do it quickly because you are about to get burned at the stake by the AGW Cult. Hope you wear Nomex underwear!
If you're trying to make the case for security through obscurity then that is a bit of an oversimplification. It obviously plays a part, but previous versions of the Mac operating system (pre-OS X) had viruses, FAR lower market share, and FAR less internet connectivity. While security through obscurity definitely has a role in this, I would say the the OS security also plays a role too. Security through obscurity seems too much of a simplification, and a convenient one for Mac haters.
When I say Macs are better I am talking about the overall experience, and I would say that is what most users (technical and non-technical) mean when they say that. I am a technical user, but I had to waste time when I used Windows machines on administering the machine (anti-virus subscriptions or install, anti-spyware, clogged registry over time, etc.). I don't spend time on that any more. I just use the machine to do work, play, create movies, etc. and it's so well thought out, integrated, and easy to use that you just have to focus on the vision of your work, not on figuring out how to make it happen. That's a bit of an oversimplification, but that's the gist of it.
I guess my experience has been that most Mac detractors that focus simply on price or technical specs, etc. are not "getting it". I used to be that way when I used Windows for 15 years. Then, on good advice from some knowledgeable relatives, I got a Mac in '04 for a video production company I was starting, and within 2 weeks I was hooked. If someone has never used a Mac as their main machine for any time then I don't expect them to "get it" because I'm not sure I can even describe in measurable detail what is better. All I know is I enjoy my Mac more than any Windows machine I've ever bought, built, etc. and it has turned me into a blathering pro-Mac advocate (as you can obviously see). I can't remember the last time I bought any product I was so pleased with, and THAT is why Mac users are so vocal, happy about their purchase, and claim they are better.
Are you really that dumb? If you give the OS permission to install it then it is installed. You need to stop posting until you learn something.
I don't know who started this BS about Mac users buy Macs because they want to feel different or special, but those who repeat it are idiots. I know lots of Mac users and have conversed with lots of Mac users online and NONE of them have had a superiority complex. Now Linux users (maybe justifiably) and Windows users (definitely not justifiable) seem to have the bigger egos from what I've seen. From what I've seen Mac users are so vocal not because they think they are special, but because they get tired of seeing lies written about the Mac from uninformed fools who've never used one. Your idiotic perpetuation of the snooty Mac user shows you don't understand why people choose to buy Macs.
"Like any other UNIX OS, OSX is less vulnerable to such attacks than Windows,"
- From a trojan? No. All are equally susceptible.
"I suspect that this botnet has been created by a geek that is sick to death of uneducated Mac fanboyism, and in a small way, I have respect for that."
- I suspect (based on my correction of you above) that you don't understand that a trojan can be installed on any computer because it is granted permission by the user. Your attempt to sneer as you look down on Mac users comes across as stupidity when you don't even seem to comprehend what you're talking about.
Funny how that worked out, isn't it?
How many Mac viruses are in the wild? How many Windows viruses?
I'll stick with my Mac and go with the REALITY of confirmed malware instead of the THEORY of Mac vulnerability.
"never had to reformat except when I rebuilt the whole computer?"
Soooo, you DID have to reformat when you rebuilt the whole computer. . . Why the hell else would you reformat?
You should listen to your family. They know what they're talking about, and they didn't base their decision on price (what fool does that?). If everything else is equal then price should be a major factor, but all else is NOT equal in the comparison. OS X is better and Macs are better. If you're happy with your Yugo computer then by all means stick with it, but if you want to experience a well integrated, rock solid experience with NO viruses then try a Mac.
Virus != Trojan
If you're going to feign righteous sarcasm at least understand what you're talking about first.
You Godwin's Rule Nazi!! On an unrelated note. . .. why are the Slashdot Nazi's timing when I hit reply versus when I hit submit? WTF business is it of theirs how long it takes me to write my comment? That sounds like something Hitler would do!!!
Sorry, couldn't resist. On the flip side, I am hereby inventing Brian's Rule which states, "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of someone ranting about Godwin's Rule approaches 1."
Are you telling me the ice age scare was a media phenomenon? But of course global warming (not relabled climate change because the initial label was no longer accurate) could NOT be the same media phenomenon? Looks like you're choosing to only accept the evidence that support the argument you want to believe, doesn't it?
I for one think this is all another media induced snowball supported by FLIMSY and narrowly viewed evidence. The pro-AGW theory has spawned cult-like behavior that allows no dissent, and to me that usually means that there's something wrong with the theory.