Yours is the second post mentioning advertising non existent jobs? Wtf?
Can you explain why they would do this?
There are lots of reasons:
You're forgetting what is probably the most common that started years ago:
0. To fulfill the legal requirement that no qualified American could be found thereby allowing them to legally hire the foreigner they already decided to hire even before the position was advertised:
Most job interviews these days are no so much to determine whether you're qualified for the position or not, but rather to determine a legally valid reason to disqualify you for the position so that they can legally hire the foreigner they already decided to hire long ago!
It simply costs too much to build, to maintain, to secure, to decommission, and that's before getting to storing the waste for thousands of years.
What about THORIUM?
Everyone always assumes "nuclear" means today's high pressure vessel uranium reactors. But what about LFTRs? (Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors)
Thorium is nuclear, which is plentiful and cheap. And the LFTR reactor design is much simpler and safer (and thus much cheaper) than today's high pressure vessel design too.
Supreme Court case United States v. Alvarez ruled the 2005 version of the Stolen Valor Act was unconstitutional, as lying -- however repugnant -- is protected first amendment speech.
Punishment for fraud however -- lying for tangible (e.g.financial) gain -- as in the revised Stolen Valor Act of 2013, IS constitutional.
So claiming you have a product which does A, B and C and costs $X is NOT free speech if the product can be show to not actually accomplish what it claims (i.e. if it can be shown to be a lie), as that is considered fraud (i.e. lying for financial (tangible) gain).
What boggles my is that there are still 45k Windows machine that are directly connected to the Internet.
I doubt that many are directly connected to the Internet.
What is more likely is most of those systems were connected to each other via File and Printer Sharing, and just one of them was somehow compromised. Then, once that one system inside the perimeter became infected, it then spread internally from system to system like wildfire.
Thus even though none (or very, very few) of the infected systems were actually directly connected to the Internet, literally thousands of systems were quickly infected due to one person's carelessness along with far too many internal systems not being patched against the File and Printer Sharing bug (which is solely the CTO's/System/Network Admin's fault).
Until that time, what I've tried to suggest -- both to the American people, but also to the world -- is that we do have to balance this issue of privacy and security.
Anyone who says such things is a traitor to America, plain and simple.
When they say such things, what they are really saying is that they believe the people should be willing to give up (some of, or all of) their Fourth Amendment right to privacy for the sake of increased security against a risk that has always been, and will likely always be, with us from now until the end of time. It's a blatant power grab, pure and simple.
They're trying to "balance" the privacy and security scales by removing weight from the privacy side and adding weight to the security side, so that the scale is thus "balanced". That's what they mean by "balancing": taking away our rights. Our liberties. For the sake of safety.
Well excuse the crap out of me but the Constitution of the United States of America DOES NOT NEED BALANCING! They're just fine where they're at on the scale thankyouverymuch.
"It's why I hate "recovery questions", they're usually bad questions that anyone could find out, and if I use some other answer, then I'm likely to forget what it is anyway."
The you're doing it wrong.
You should not have to remember your bogus answers. You should instead record them in your encrypted password safe.
I probably have over 100 different accounts at 100 different sites all over the web and each and every one of them has a different randomly generated strong password and nonsense security questions (when they let me compose my own) and corresponding nonsense answer, and I can assure you I don't have nary a one of them memorized.
Because I don't have to. I use a password safe.
The only people that whine about how difficult it is to remember passwords or answers to security questions are those who, like fools that don't understand or practice good security, use the same password for multiple web sites (because <whine!> they otherwise can't remember all of their passwords! </whine!>).
Stop whining and doing it wrong and start doing it right by taking security seriously: use a damn password safe so each and every account you have can have a completely different password and/or security question/answer!
Bottom line is: not everything that "trends" under automatic algorithms (which would be filtered out by humans too scared of what they're seeing) is bullshit.
Quite right. The twin towers and building 7 were all brought down by controlled demolition, and anyone who believes otherwise has either: a) not bothered to look at the overwhelming evidence supporting the theory, or: b) has looked at the evidence but is in self denial over it due to the extreme cognitive dissonance that frequently results in people who attempt to seriously entertain such a belief.
For the last 100 years any idiot could 'hack' the patient file hanging on the foot of the bed with a tool called a 'pen', changing 5 milligrams to 75 or whatever.
Quite true, but in order to do that you had to be physically present.
Now you need some brains.
Brains is not the problem.
The fact that you can do such nefarious hacking remotely is the problem. You no longer need to be physically present.
No. KB 2952664 is a Compatibility update for upgrading Windows 7. It has nothing to do with telemetry.
And KB 3022345 -- which does have to do with telemetry -- has been superseded by KB 3068708.
Other telemetry updates are:
KB 3075249 "Update that adds telemetry points to consent.exe in Windows 8.1 and Windows 7"
KB 3080149 "Update for customer experience and diagnostic telemetry"
.
Then there is KB 3021917 ("Update to Windows 7 SP1 for performance improvements") which is sort of a telemetry update insomuch as it does indeed send back telemetry data to Microsoft, but supposedly only data related to performance issues and not actual usage.
I agree about the.NET recompiles which seem to always occur just after a Windows Update, but proposing that as the cause of the OP's problem is just a WAG. Proper investigation into the problem is the only reliably way to get to the bottom of the problem.
What I'm trying to say is you should just offer intelligent GUESSES, but rather offer guidance in how to gather the necessary empirical hard evidence of precisely WHAT is causing the slowdown.
Process Explorer should help a lot in this regard, but Windows itself has a Performance Monitor feature that should allow them to dig even deeper.
To quote my own Mother, "I don't want to learn all that technical stuff, I just want to use my computer".
Yea, I have to say, I have to clean her machine off of crap every year. Every time I go over there, Internet Explorer has 5 or 6 toolbars installed because she clicks on everything.
And no, she won't let me restrict and lock down the machine, I've tried that.
Then she shouldn't be allowed anywhere near any computer that's connected to the Internet.
Seriously.
An Internet connected computer in the wrong hands can be a very dangerous threat to the rest of us who share the Information Super-Highway with her. Her incompetence and irresponsibility can seriously hurt a lot of people very quickly.
She is behaving like a person who wants to drive a car but is not interested in obtaining a license that proves she knows how to operate said motor vehicle is a safe manner. She just wants to get on the road. To hell with leaning how to drive!
That's irresponsible.
If she cannot take the time to learn how to safely operate a computer connected to the Internet or cannot demonstrate that she knows how to do so, then she should NOT be alowed anywhere near one.
IMO only a very foolish company or gov't entity would ever allow a computer running an antiquated insecure operating system controlling a very expensive and critical piece of company equipment to be connected to the internet or rely on a vendor that doesn't support an operating system any newer than one that's already 12 years old which they knew for years ahead of time was no longer going to be supported.
Even though no camera was actually stolen and each "suspect" knew this (were privy to the experiment), each examiner fingered whichever "suspect" that they were told beforehand might have stolen it.
Even though no camera was actually stolen and each "suspect" knew this (were privy to the experiment), each examiner fingered whichever "suspect" that they were told beforehand might have stolen it.
And don't forget, they've got twice as much money for advertising those drugs as they have for researching those drugs and running those clinical trials.
With good reason I would suspect.
Developing a new drug is a very risky and very expensive thing. R&D costs money and lots of it, while generating exactly zero dollars in income.
The sales of said drugs (i.e. the fruit of R&D's labor) however, is what generates income, and is what ultimately covers the incredible cost involved in developing it in the first place (as well as the cost of failed research efforts on drugs which "never panned out" and thus never made it to market).
If the percentages spent on promotion verses R&D were reversed (e.g. only 13.4% on marketing verses 24.4% for research and development), they might not be able to generate enough income to cover the cost of all the dollars they were sinking into developing their new wonder drug, and then where would we be? After all, "He who has a thing to sell and goes to whisper in a well, is not as apt to get the dollars as he who climbs a tree and hollers!"
Now I'm no fan of seeing so many advertisements for drugs in so many magazines, etc (since such advertisements are mostly lots of hype sprinkled with heavy doses of fine printed medical gobbledy-gook which I can neither read what with my poor eyesight nor understand what with my non-existent medical training), but bashing drug companies for spending more on advertising than your average non-drug company is hardly a convincing argument that they are therefore all greedy sons of bitches. (There are much easier ways to make money than developing new life-saving drugs after all, so greed (i.e. wont for profit) can't be the sole motivating factor).
Bottom line: given a choice between fewer life-saving drugs but a couple extra dollars in my pocket verses a realible supply of some life-saving drug that I might some day need in order to survive (at the marginal cost of more dollars going into their pockets instead of mine), I vote for the latter thank-you-very-much.
NOW THEN, getting back on topic...
If they have indeed had more than plenty enough time to recoup the costs incurred in developing said drug and are now simply wishing to prolong their ride on the profit train their investment generated because they inadequately failed to plan ahead for said train eventually reaching the end of the line which they knew was coming, then fuck 'em. They should have planned ahead better.
Slashdot Mirror
You're forgetting what is probably the most common that started years ago:
0. To fulfill the legal requirement that no qualified American could be found thereby allowing them to legally hire the foreigner they already decided to hire even before the position was advertised:
Most job interviews these days are no so much to determine whether you're qualified for the position or not, but rather to determine a legally valid reason to disqualify you for the position so that they can legally hire the foreigner they already decided to hire long ago!
Today's job market sucks. :(
What about THORIUM?
Everyone always assumes "nuclear" means today's high pressure vessel uranium reactors. But what about LFTRs? (Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors)
Thorium is nuclear, which is plentiful and cheap. And the LFTR reactor design is much simpler and safer (and thus much cheaper) than today's high pressure vessel design too.
Safer. Cheaper. Plentiful.
Thorium is the nuclear of our future.
Supreme Court case United States v. Alvarez ruled the 2005 version of the Stolen Valor Act was unconstitutional, as lying -- however repugnant -- is protected first amendment speech.
Punishment for fraud however -- lying for tangible (e.g.financial) gain -- as in the revised Stolen Valor Act of 2013, IS constitutional.
So claiming you have a product which does A, B and C and costs $X is NOT free speech if the product can be show to not actually accomplish what it claims (i.e. if it can be shown to be a lie), as that is considered fraud (i.e. lying for financial (tangible) gain).
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer.
Ref:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Alvarez
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stolen_Valor_Act_of_2005
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stolen_Valor_Act_of_2013
I doubt that many are directly connected to the Internet.
What is more likely is most of those systems were connected to each other via File and Printer Sharing, and just one of them was somehow compromised. Then, once that one system inside the perimeter became infected, it then spread internally from system to system like wildfire.
Thus even though none (or very, very few) of the infected systems were actually directly connected to the Internet, literally thousands of systems were quickly infected due to one person's carelessness along with far too many internal systems not being patched against the File and Printer Sharing bug (which is solely the CTO's/System/Network Admin's fault).
The myth: that driving while talking on a cell phone is just as dangerous as driving drunk.
Result: myth CONFIRMED.
http://www.discovery.com/tv-shows/mythbusters/videos/cell-phone-vs-drunk-driving-minimyth/
Anyone who says such things is a traitor to America, plain and simple.
When they say such things, what they are really saying is that they believe the people should be willing to give up (some of, or all of) their Fourth Amendment right to privacy for the sake of increased security against a risk that has always been, and will likely always be, with us from now until the end of time. It's a blatant power grab, pure and simple.
They're trying to "balance" the privacy and security scales by removing weight from the privacy side and adding weight to the security side, so that the scale is thus "balanced". That's what they mean by "balancing": taking away our rights. Our liberties. For the sake of safety.
Well excuse the crap out of me but the Constitution of the United States of America DOES NOT NEED BALANCING! They're just fine where they're at on the scale thankyouverymuch.
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Benjamin_Franklin/:
The you're doing it wrong.
You should not have to remember your bogus answers. You should instead record them in your encrypted password safe.
I probably have over 100 different accounts at 100 different sites all over the web and each and every one of them has a different randomly generated strong password and nonsense security questions (when they let me compose my own) and corresponding nonsense answer, and I can assure you I don't have nary a one of them memorized.
Because I don't have to. I use a password safe.
The only people that whine about how difficult it is to remember passwords or answers to security questions are those who, like fools that don't understand or practice good security, use the same password for multiple web sites (because <whine!> they otherwise can't remember all of their passwords! </whine!>).
Stop whining and doing it wrong and start doing it right by taking security seriously: use a damn password safe so each and every account you have can have a completely different password and/or security question/answer!
Bottom line is: not everything that "trends" under automatic algorithms (which would be filtered out by humans too scared of what they're seeing) is bullshit.
Quite right. The twin towers and building 7 were all brought down by controlled demolition, and anyone who believes otherwise has either: a) not bothered to look at the overwhelming evidence supporting the theory, or: b) has looked at the evidence but is in self denial over it due to the extreme cognitive dissonance that frequently results in people who attempt to seriously entertain such a belief.
Waht the FRICK does this have to do with "what are anonymous ways to pay for goods and services"?!
And WHY the frick was it moderated "Informative?"
Guns and methods of suicide have NOTHING to do with anonymous ways to pay for good and services! What has happened to slashdot moderation lately?
WTF does this have to do with "what are anonymous ways to pay for goods and services"?!
And WTF ( WHY the frick) was it moderated "Informative?"
Guns and methods of suicide have JACK to do with anonymous ways to pay for good and services! What has happened to slashdot?
In binary ALMOST all primes end in "1".
Please provide a single example of a prime, in binary, that does NOT end in "1".
In 1985 IBM had 230,000 employees mostly in the USA. Now its 71,000 - and who knows where.
According to wikipedia, they had 379,592 employees in 2014. That's a bit more than 71,000.
For the last 100 years any idiot could 'hack' the patient file hanging on the foot of the bed with a tool called a 'pen', changing 5 milligrams to 75 or whatever.
Quite true, but in order to do that you had to be physically present.
Now you need some brains.
Brains is not the problem.
The fact that you can do such nefarious hacking remotely is the problem. You no longer need to be physically present.
THAT is what is concerning.
No. KB 2952664 is a Compatibility update for upgrading Windows 7. It has nothing to do with telemetry.
And KB 3022345 -- which does have to do with telemetry -- has been superseded by KB 3068708.
Other telemetry updates are:
.
Then there is KB 3021917 ("Update to Windows 7 SP1 for performance improvements") which is sort of a telemetry update insomuch as it does indeed send back telemetry data to Microsoft, but supposedly only data related to performance issues and not actual usage.
That's all I know about.
FYI: Web site for encouraging responsible UAV operation:
http://www.dronepilotwings.com/
(run by Randy Cassingham of This Is True fame)
I agree about the .NET recompiles which seem to always occur just after a Windows Update, but proposing that as the cause of the OP's problem is just a WAG. Proper investigation into the problem is the only reliably way to get to the bottom of the problem.
What I'm trying to say is you should just offer intelligent GUESSES, but rather offer guidance in how to gather the necessary empirical hard evidence of precisely WHAT is causing the slowdown.
Process Explorer should help a lot in this regard, but Windows itself has a Performance Monitor feature that should allow them to dig even deeper.
Don't guess. Know.
No GPS. No web. No chat. No texting. No apps. No operating system at all, to speak of.
All it can do is make phone calls and receive phone calls. That's it.
It's the ultimate dumb phone.
To quote my own Mother, "I don't want to learn all that technical stuff, I just want to use my computer".
Yea, I have to say, I have to clean her machine off of crap every year. Every time I go over there, Internet Explorer has 5 or 6 toolbars installed because she clicks on everything.
And no, she won't let me restrict and lock down the machine, I've tried that.
Then she shouldn't be allowed anywhere near any computer that's connected to the Internet.
Seriously.
An Internet connected computer in the wrong hands can be a very dangerous threat to the rest of us who share the Information Super-Highway with her. Her incompetence and irresponsibility can seriously hurt a lot of people very quickly.
She is behaving like a person who wants to drive a car but is not interested in obtaining a license that proves she knows how to operate said motor vehicle is a safe manner. She just wants to get on the road. To hell with leaning how to drive!
That's irresponsible.
If she cannot take the time to learn how to safely operate a computer connected to the Internet or cannot demonstrate that she knows how to do so, then she should NOT be alowed anywhere near one.
At least not without close supervision.
IMO only a very foolish company or gov't entity would ever allow a computer running an antiquated insecure operating system controlling a very expensive and critical piece of company equipment to be connected to the internet or rely on a vendor that doesn't support an operating system any newer than one that's already 12 years old which they knew for years ahead of time was no longer going to be supported.
But then maybe that's just me.
In a democracy, the public IS a higher authority than the government. Sometimes, the officials forget this.
No. The official know this all too well. Sadly, it is the CITIZENS who are the ones who have forgotten.
Similar results occurred in a similar "experiment" on lie detector operators (polygraph operators) performed years ago by 60 Minutes:
60 Minutes - Truth and Consequences
Even though no camera was actually stolen and each "suspect" knew this (were privy to the experiment), each examiner fingered whichever "suspect" that they were told beforehand might have stolen it.
Similar results occurred in a similar "experiment" on lie detector operators (polygraph operators) performed years ago by 60 Minutes:
60 Minutes - Truth and Consequences
Even though no camera was actually stolen and each "suspect" knew this (were privy to the experiment), each examiner fingered whichever "suspect" that they were told beforehand might have stolen it.
"You don't have to pass an IQ test to be in the Senate."
In a democracy the majority should get their way - by definition.
Freedom of speech allows everyone the right to voice their opionion in the form of criticism towards another or their beliefs.
A right is something that is enjoyed equally by the minority as it is by the majority. Otherwise it is not a right but a wrong.
With good reason I would suspect.
Developing a new drug is a very risky and very expensive thing. R&D costs money and lots of it, while generating exactly zero dollars in income.
The sales of said drugs (i.e. the fruit of R&D's labor) however, is what generates income, and is what ultimately covers the incredible cost involved in developing it in the first place (as well as the cost of failed research efforts on drugs which "never panned out" and thus never made it to market).
If the percentages spent on promotion verses R&D were reversed (e.g. only 13.4% on marketing verses 24.4% for research and development), they might not be able to generate enough income to cover the cost of all the dollars they were sinking into developing their new wonder drug, and then where would we be? After all, "He who has a thing to sell and goes to whisper in a well, is not as apt to get the dollars as he who climbs a tree and hollers!"
Now I'm no fan of seeing so many advertisements for drugs in so many magazines, etc (since such advertisements are mostly lots of hype sprinkled with heavy doses of fine printed medical gobbledy-gook which I can neither read what with my poor eyesight nor understand what with my non-existent medical training), but bashing drug companies for spending more on advertising than your average non-drug company is hardly a convincing argument that they are therefore all greedy sons of bitches. (There are much easier ways to make money than developing new life-saving drugs after all, so greed (i.e. wont for profit) can't be the sole motivating factor).
Bottom line: given a choice between fewer life-saving drugs but a couple extra dollars in my pocket verses a realible supply of some life-saving drug that I might some day need in order to survive (at the marginal cost of more dollars going into their pockets instead of mine), I vote for the latter thank-you-very-much.
NOW THEN, getting back on topic...
If they have indeed had more than plenty enough time to recoup the costs incurred in developing said drug and are now simply wishing to prolong their ride on the profit train their investment generated because they inadequately failed to plan ahead for said train eventually reaching the end of the line which they knew was coming, then fuck 'em. They should have planned ahead better.