and this why its a status symbol. Zuckerberg is flaunting the fact he is so powerful, he doesn't have to care what you think about him. not only does he have "fuck you money", he has "fuck you" social status.
But when a prof shows up to teach in sandals and and shorts, its NOT a 'fuck you'.
your conforming to a position to seek favors. If your the one receiving and not giving the favors.
That's just it, I'm not receiving favors.An example would be simply meeting my father for lunch. I could show up in anything and it wouldn't make a difference, but its something that I would drop the T-shirt and hoody for and switch to a shirt and sports jacket.
Another example would be when visiting religious sites as tourist. Now some of them have full on security enforcing a dress code (covered arms and legs etc for example), but most do not. Nonetheless I would respect the dress code and even go beyond the absolute minimums... even if I could have gotten in my bathing suit (and there is ALWAYS a few people obliviously doing just that).
When my UPS battery starts going bad, the first sign is that it just cuts the power without warning. If you have a SSD, that could be the deathblow that sends your data bye-bye.
What is the first sign that the backup power on the SSD isn't going twitchy?
At least you could get redundant UPS and test them from time to time.
And at the end of the day you still need backups. On disk backup power still isn't going to help you if someone spills their coffee into your computer, or if the building burns down.
That will give absolutely zero help when the machine blows a fuse and halts.
And what if the "fuse blown" is inside the SSD itself?
Onboard reliable power only helps in a very limited number of places that a UPS does not, and there are still plenty of obscure failure modes that onboard power doesn't protect you from.
At some point you have to accept that some things are beyond your control and maybe you should have a backup or two of your important data.
If you are worried about data loss during a power failure wouldn't the money be better spent ensuring there isn't a power loss?
UPS are cheap and reliable, and give you time to shut down.
Its interesting and good to know that the intel SSD survived thousands of powercycles while it was trying to work without losing a single byte of data. But my desktop SSD is on a UPS. And my laptop has a battery built into it. So a power failure affecting the SSD in the middle of an operation is pretty much unheard of.
I routinely use ethernet at home and work for larger file transfers. My home office is now GigE -- but even 100Base-T is markedly faster than my home office wifi, especially as my home wifi-AP is on a different floor from my office so as to give better signal to the tablets and toys (kids 3DS, WiiU, etc..) in the living room.
I still run into needing ethernet at client sites regularly. And in hotel rooms in many places. Lots of businesses do not deploy wifi. As someone who does a lot of IT I also use it routinely to program routers and other network devices too.
Its just plain silly to need a dongle for all that in a "pro" laptop.
The imac has a 780M. Maybe I want a 780. The 780M benchmarks at about half the 780. they aren't even in the same ballpark. A sub $200 GTX 660 ti as fast as a 780M.
You can throw a 2nd monitor on for a few hundred plus cables, so let's call it $3750.
Except that the 2nd monitor doesn't match at all. And maybe I want a 3rd or even fourth. Or maybe I want a narrower bezel for my multi monitor setup and I'm kind of stuck with the imac bezel since my computer is glued to it.
3tb storage
I can do triple that in a mini tower without breaking a sweat.
you are at $3300
Yeah, for a 780M and 3TB. I can build a desktop using premium parts and come in under 2k for the same performance.
For $3300, I can load it with 8TB put in an actual GTX 780 and still have cash lying around for a decent 2nd screen.
. So what minor change do you want to make that's an upgrade that a $4875 Pro setup can't handle?
See above. The desktop PC with 8TB and an actual GTX 780 runs about $3k, you now want me to spend $4875 on. And that doesn't include a screen, never mind two of them. And the dual firepro D300's? They're equivalent to the FirePro W7000, which individually benchmark even worse than the 780M in the imac. And the GTX 780 in the $3k PC is easily better than two D300.
But hey for $1000 more I can get dual D700 which is pointless as for $500 I could add a 2nd GTX 780 to my $3k PC... so $3500 all in vs what $5500 now? And I'm still short storage and screens? So $6500?
The MacPro is better for OpenCL I would hope and the Xeons and ECC ram have their place... but its not what I need by a long shot. And it almost twice the price for the same performance I get from a $3500 PC? And that 3500 PC literally runs rings around the iMac.
You rarely use it and in places you need to plug in you just attach the dongle and leave it for weeks.
So you have to carry it with you wherever you go, just in case. That is not convenient.
Finally not that many people need more power than the iMac either.
Lots of people want more than an nvidia mobile graphics card.
Lots of people want multiple monitor setups (yes the imac supports it but its clumsy because you its difficult to match monitors or use the monitors you like due to having your computer glued onto one. People defend the macpro's lack of room for internal storage by claiming that "anyone using one" is using rack mounted external stuff anyway... and that's fine... but I'm not using rack mounted external stuff and I want more storage than I can fit into an imac without having extra crap sitting on my desk.
There are lots of other scenarios where the imac falls annoyingly short.
Yes its enough for most people. But it falls well short for a lot of people.
. More over it isn't a joke to jump up to the Pro because the price spread isn't that large.
But its jump forwards in price, and sideways to what people actually want. I don't want a Xeon. That's a bunch of money for something I don't need at all. And I still can't put the video card I want in one... I can put a powerful video solution in it sure... but at an exorbitant cost that isn't at all what I want, nor priced at all where it makes sense to buy one.
Oh, it's one of THOSE things. Like, not the first HUMAN to do a feat, but the first black female human over the age of 33 and under 150 pounds with size 8 sneakers to do a feat.
No, its like when some tech that is generally only found in exotic sports cars shows up in a mass market product that is expected to sell in the millions.
Like if Honda had gone with ceramic brakes across its Civic line. Sure it's not new, we've seen them in Porsches and other exotic sports cars and in high speed trains for years already. But it would still be big news if something like the Honda Civic line was switching over.
Seems to be typical/. ignorance. Some new tech shows up in a Porsche Carrera GT and everyone here scoffs... "call me when I can get it in a normal car", then it shows up in a Honda Civic and the same people scoff... "that's not news, Porsche did it years ago..."
Getting an actual copy is harder than it sounds. In my jurisdiction the PDF is $175, if you want the 'handbook' that explains it laymans terms, and the charts and calculators... the package is $325.
I'm better off hiring a contractor unless I plan to do a lo of DIY electrical projects... just on that alone.
California means nothing, it's a word that a novelist made up and appeared as a fictional land in "Las sergas de EsplandiÃfn" - a book which the conquistadores were familiar with, and from which they drew the name.
You appear to be right, the origin I had appears to be a minor and largely discredited theory.
In any case, the premise that it is a 'nothing' word simply because it names a made up land in work of fiction is not convincing. Even if that is its origin, the name likely still means something.
Many authors select names with care, and they are not usually just random collections of sounds. (The exception being modern bad fantasy writers - who seem to delight in just throwing gibberish peppered with random puncuation at the wall.) Anyhow...
The origin of the state name, Texas, is from the word, "Tejas", which means 'friends' in the Caddo language. (from wikipedia, but it is cited, and is confirmed elsewhere.)
Further, it is used as a greeting. So the "hello friends" interpretation is reasonable.
I have the Macbook Pro, not the newer Pro, but by way of analogy compare Apple's reversible magnetic power cable vs. everyone else's barrel plugs. Apple does a lot of little things better on their computers.
Meh, I have a macbook pro too, but I'm more than a little non-plussed by the newest one... no ethernet without dongle is a joke in a pro level product. But on the upside its the first time they've finally had the sense to put a video port on it that anyone actually will be able to use without an adapter. (Mine has mini-displayport... I have encountered the ability to use it with someone elses equipment without an adapter that I brought myself exactly 0 times.)
So yeah, I like the magsafe adapter a lot, but I wouldn't say Apple does a lot of little things better. They seem to have their head up their ass just as much as the others.
As for the comparison, its meaningless. The number of people who would need or could need those mac specs is vanishingly small.
Lets look at a mac that compares to my current workstation. Oh. No. Can't do that Apple doesn't make one at all.
The mac mini is woefully under powered compared to my desktop. The imac gets closer, but still falls well short in key areas that can't be upgraded. The Mac Pro... ok that hits it out of the park... but its overkill and has a price to match.
THAT is the problem. Lots of perfectly normal people need and want to exceed the limitations of a mac mini or imac but jumping into a mac pro is absurd.
To use a car analogy Apple makes a VW Golf Hatchback (mac mini), a VW Jetta Sedan (imac), and an 18 wheel semi tractor trailer (mac pro).
Lots of people out there need or want something with more power and capacity than a Jetta or Golf but they need a semi tractor like they need another hole in their head. Does apple make a pickup truck? an SUV? Nope. Yet lots of people want those sorts of vehicle.
Its actually pretty interesting to read where the various state names originated. People don't really think about them, but its almost invariably not nearly all that... impressive.
Half a dozen at least are named for Kings and Queens (Carolinas, Georgia, Louisiana, Virginias...) New York is named for the Duke of York. Kind of amusing the names stuck what with the revolution and all.
Indiana is roughly 'land of indians' Oklahoma is literally 'red person' in a native dialect Caliornia is 'hot oven' in spanish Vermont is 'green mountain' in french
And perhaps most amusing Texas amusingly is "hello friend'.
With only minor changes in history, we could have had a nuclear superpower named roughly "The Republic of Hey Buddy"
Some children have baby monitors in their room from birth, gps trackers by the time they are toddlers if not before. They graduate to playing with an tablet that starts collecting information on them by 4 or 5, and a few more years after that and they've got a cell phone tracking nearly every move and social interaction.
Maybe not you or your children. But its absolutely true that full surveillance from birth is a thing now.
As parents its an interesting conundrum choosing between the security of a toddler gps and the knowledge that doing so actively prevents your child from ever being properly alone or even possibly lost. And as parents, I feel that as terrifying as that is for both child and parent, the possibility of being lost is a NECESSARY part of growing up and being an independent responsible person. They need that sense of being able to get lost; even if they don't actually get lost.
We elected not to track the kids, and to give them more space than many of their peers have.
But I know of many families where the kids have no real privacy at all, ever. If they write in their diary, their parents will have read it. If they have a box they keep special things in their parents will have have rooted through it.
I wouldn't be above searching their room and belongings if I had a concern, but I'd have to have a genuine concern to do that invasion of privacy. I think all kids need *some* privacy, and increasingly more as they get older, and many do not get it.
But whenever they've gone outside to play and they've wandered off with friends or whatever and aren't where they are supposed to be and forgot to check in with us... well... I completely get the fear that rises up and leads some parents to go what i think is completely overboard.
I appreciate what Snowden is saying, but perhaps fewer narcissistic platitudes and more documents on the front pages? Snowden isn't Jesus, the more he toots "It's not about me", the more it becomes about him
Is Snowden looking for the limelight, or is the media just hanging on his every word. Because really there's not really that much of him exposed, he doesn't say all that much at all. But there is a lot of exposure of what little there is. I think the media not Snowden should take the brunt of your distaste.
Hopefully he has the good sense not to make this about him. But I don't expect him to live a disconnected hermit life to avoid others trying to make it about him.
When someone shows up to work over-dressed, I immediately think he's compensating for lack of skill.
There is the "norm". Ie. people who are dressed appropriately to the norm.
This article is referring to people who are UNDER dressed relative to the norm and suggests that that in some circumstances this can confer additional 'status' onto them. Their primary examples appear to be harvard profs and facebook CEOs.
You are talking about people who are OVER dressed relative to the norm, which is sort of beside the point.
I think the obvious message is, if people see someoe in authority of flouts social norms, it must be, because they are so talented, social norms don't apply.
This is spot on. But the article is only looking at one side of the coin. I consider dressing to the norms in most environments to be a sign of respect to the other people -- so showing up under-dressed and being able to "get away with it" may be some sort of demonstration of status... but at the same time it's likely to lower my estimation of you. I dress very casually for work, but will dress up for certain meetings not because I need to but out of respect for the people I'm meeting with and the event.
So Zuckerberg showing up at something in a jeans and hoodie just reinforces my negative impression of him as someone who just doesn't respect anyone else around him. An impression that started with him hoovering student profiles into the initial facebook without their consent and that has only been solidified since then. So while I recognize that he can get away with it, it doesn't raise my estimation of him as a person in the least.
University profs... I'm not really sure where that's coming from. That was the full range; from shorts and sandals with a beard to clean shaven suits. There was maybe some correlation with subject matter -- the business related electives I took (Economics, Organizational Behaviour and Psychology, etc) were more likely to be taught by suits than programming language and compiler design, but there really wasn't a correlation with tenure. The "norm" at university was that the profs generally wore whatever the hell they liked and were comfortable with. And the same went for the students. I certainly didn't dress up for lectures, and I didn't expect them to dress up for me.
Everyone was more or less beyond correlating image with competency. Maybe that was just my university experience. Maybe harvard is different.
They denied a "secret contract" to incorporate a known flawed RNG into BSAFE.
They did NOT deny a secret contract to incorporate DRBG.
If they did not know, at the time they made the deal that the RNG was flawed, then they could truthfully claim they did not knowingly take money to incorporate a known flawed RNG.
The pedant in me would like them to categorically deny any link between the $10million and incorporating Dual EC DBRG.
They didn't actually do that.
Given just how much scrutiny they KNEW their statement would be put under; and the fact that their lawyers would have reviewed the thing before it going up, it is striking that so many news sources are identifying it as a dodge rather than a head o denial.
Its hard to believe, again, given just how much scrutiny they KNEW their statement would be under, that the lack of certainty was anything but calculated.
Me, I havent' seen the documents alleging the connection bewtween 10M and setting Dual EC DRBG as default in BSAFE... and I would dearly like to see how much of a smoking gun it really is.
In any sort of real emergency, I presume the fire department would just break in. The condo I'm in now is are duplex and row-home style units so its pretty much exactly like houses.
But my previous condos were 'apartment style' and there was no master keys their either; and I presume they'd just break the door down.
In a non emergency, they notify the owners in advance or coordinate with them if its just a particular unit, and its up to the owners to let them in. A good recent example of a mandatory check is the annual inspection of the smoke detectors and sprinkler systems. The strata and management company picks a day, sends out a notice and the inspectors come out, and its up to the owners to let them in or make arrangements to let them in. (Usually there's someone on strata available that you can leave a key with for the day, or you can leave it with your neighbor, etc...)
Any units that they can't gain access too on the original day, get picked up on a subsequent day, coordinated directly with the owner(s) that got missed, and at those owners expense.
Its never happened that an owner has refused or been totally uncooperative with these checks; however my understanding is that we need these inspections to meet bylaw as well as insurance requirements. I'm honestly not sure what would happen if an owner refused to cooperate; whether it would or could be escalated to the police to force the issue, or what...?
If he's got a condo, the superintendent has a key for emergency purposes.
I don't know if you mean something different by "condo"; but I've lived in a couple and live in one now, and there is no 'superindentent'. There is a strata corporation with a president and council who are elected from the owners, a 3rd party management company who provides some legal services, and a variety of contracts with trades... but nobody has a key to all the units. Hell, most owners re-key them as a matter of course when they buy them.
Is it clear that the malicious urls actually hosted different payloads? Or did MSE and McAffee just get hammered by same virus strain 30 times?
I realize that if a strain is common and being missed that it's a big deal, but it does distort the picture greatly if they just keep testing the same "gap" in security over and over again.
There is also the question of what some of this stuff is and whether or not its even within MSE's purview. Kapersky Internet Security and NIS etc are full system protection -- they get into your email, they run your firewall, etc. In other words I don't expect MSE to block "threats" that are outside its functional scope. (And in exchange for that MSE has never completely effed up my ability to receive email... something NIS does on a regular basis.)
Slashdot Mirror
and this why its a status symbol. Zuckerberg is flaunting the fact he is so powerful, he doesn't have to care what you think about him. not only does he have "fuck you money", he has "fuck you" social status.
But when a prof shows up to teach in sandals and and shorts, its NOT a 'fuck you'.
your conforming to a position to seek favors. If your the one receiving and not giving the favors.
That's just it, I'm not receiving favors.An example would be simply meeting my father for lunch. I could show up in anything and it wouldn't make a difference, but its something that I would drop the T-shirt and hoody for and switch to a shirt and sports jacket.
Another example would be when visiting religious sites as tourist. Now some of them have full on security enforcing a dress code (covered arms and legs etc for example), but most do not. Nonetheless I would respect the dress code and even go beyond the absolute minimums... even if I could have gotten in my bathing suit (and there is ALWAYS a few people obliviously doing just that).
BWAHAHAHAHA! Cheap UPSs are not reliable.
You are conflating "cheap UPSs are reliable" with "UPS is a cheap and reliable solution".
Good UPS solutions are still cheap relative to the hardware and data being protected.
When my UPS battery starts going bad, the first sign is that it just cuts the power without warning. If you have a SSD, that could be the deathblow that sends your data bye-bye.
What is the first sign that the backup power on the SSD isn't going twitchy?
At least you could get redundant UPS and test them from time to time.
And at the end of the day you still need backups. On disk backup power still isn't going to help you if someone spills their coffee into your computer, or if the building burns down.
That will give absolutely zero help when the machine blows a fuse and halts.
And what if the "fuse blown" is inside the SSD itself?
Onboard reliable power only helps in a very limited number of places that a UPS does not, and there are still plenty of obscure failure modes that onboard power doesn't protect you from.
At some point you have to accept that some things are beyond your control and maybe you should have a backup or two of your important data.
If you are worried about data loss during a power failure wouldn't the money be better spent ensuring there isn't a power loss?
UPS are cheap and reliable, and give you time to shut down.
Its interesting and good to know that the intel SSD survived thousands of powercycles while it was trying to work without losing a single byte of data. But my desktop SSD is on a UPS. And my laptop has a battery built into it. So a power failure affecting the SSD in the middle of an operation is pretty much unheard of.
I routinely use ethernet at home and work for larger file transfers. My home office is now GigE -- but even 100Base-T is markedly faster than my home office wifi, especially as my home wifi-AP is on a different floor from my office so as to give better signal to the tablets and toys (kids 3DS, WiiU, etc..) in the living room.
I still run into needing ethernet at client sites regularly. And in hotel rooms in many places. Lots of businesses do not deploy wifi. As someone who does a lot of IT I also use it routinely to program routers and other network devices too.
Its just plain silly to need a dongle for all that in a "pro" laptop.
Nvidia 780
The imac has a 780M. Maybe I want a 780. The 780M benchmarks at about half the 780. they aren't even in the same ballpark. A sub $200 GTX 660 ti as fast as a 780M.
You can throw a 2nd monitor on for a few hundred plus cables, so let's call it $3750.
Except that the 2nd monitor doesn't match at all. And maybe I want a 3rd or even fourth. Or maybe I want a narrower bezel for my multi monitor setup and I'm kind of stuck with the imac bezel since my computer is glued to it.
3tb storage
I can do triple that in a mini tower without breaking a sweat.
you are at $3300
Yeah, for a 780M and 3TB. I can build a desktop using premium parts and come in under 2k for the same performance.
For $3300, I can load it with 8TB put in an actual GTX 780 and still have cash lying around for a decent 2nd screen.
. So what minor change do you want to make that's an upgrade that a $4875 Pro setup can't handle?
See above. The desktop PC with 8TB and an actual GTX 780 runs about $3k, you now want me to spend $4875 on. And that doesn't include a screen, never mind two of them. And the dual firepro D300's? They're equivalent to the FirePro W7000, which individually benchmark even worse than the 780M in the imac. And the GTX 780 in the $3k PC is easily better than two D300.
But hey for $1000 more I can get dual D700 which is pointless as for $500 I could add a 2nd GTX 780 to my $3k PC ... so $3500 all in vs what $5500 now? And I'm still short storage and screens? So $6500?
The MacPro is better for OpenCL I would hope and the Xeons and ECC ram have their place... but its not what I need by a long shot. And it almost twice the price for the same performance I get from a $3500 PC? And that 3500 PC literally runs rings around the iMac.
You rarely use it and in places you need to plug in you just attach the dongle and leave it for weeks.
So you have to carry it with you wherever you go, just in case. That is not convenient.
Finally not that many people need more power than the iMac either.
Lots of people want more than an nvidia mobile graphics card.
Lots of people want multiple monitor setups (yes the imac supports it but its clumsy because you its difficult to match monitors or use the monitors you like due to having your computer glued onto one.
People defend the macpro's lack of room for internal storage by claiming that "anyone using one" is using rack mounted external stuff anyway... and that's fine... but I'm not using rack mounted external stuff and I want more storage than I can fit into an imac without having extra crap sitting on my desk.
There are lots of other scenarios where the imac falls annoyingly short.
Yes its enough for most people. But it falls well short for a lot of people.
. More over it isn't a joke to jump up to the Pro because the price spread isn't that large.
But its jump forwards in price, and sideways to what people actually want. I don't want a Xeon. That's a bunch of money for something I don't need at all. And I still can't put the video card I want in one... I can put a powerful video solution in it sure... but at an exorbitant cost that isn't at all what I want, nor priced at all where it makes sense to buy one.
Oh, it's one of THOSE things. Like, not the first HUMAN to do a feat, but the first black female human over the age of 33 and under 150 pounds with size 8 sneakers to do a feat.
No, its like when some tech that is generally only found in exotic sports cars shows up in a mass market product that is expected to sell in the millions.
Like if Honda had gone with ceramic brakes across its Civic line. Sure it's not new, we've seen them in Porsches and other exotic sports cars and in high speed trains for years already. But it would still be big news if something like the Honda Civic line was switching over.
Seems to be typical /. ignorance. Some new tech shows up in a Porsche Carrera GT and everyone here scoffs ... "call me when I can get it in a normal car", then it shows up in a Honda Civic and the same people scoff ... "that's not news, Porsche did it years ago..."
Things to remember about the electrical code:
Getting an actual copy is harder than it sounds. In my jurisdiction the PDF is $175, if you want the 'handbook' that explains it laymans terms, and the charts and calculators... the package is $325.
I'm better off hiring a contractor unless I plan to do a lo of DIY electrical projects... just on that alone.
California means nothing, it's a word that a novelist made up and appeared as a fictional land in "Las sergas de EsplandiÃfn" - a book which the conquistadores were familiar with, and from which they drew the name.
You appear to be right, the origin I had appears to be a minor and largely discredited theory.
In any case, the premise that it is a 'nothing' word simply because it names a made up land in work of fiction is not convincing. Even if that is its origin, the name likely still means something.
Many authors select names with care, and they are not usually just random collections of sounds. (The exception being modern bad fantasy writers - who seem to delight in just throwing gibberish peppered with random puncuation at the wall.) Anyhow...
I located an interesting article:
http://archive.org/stream/originmeaningofn00davi/originmeaningofn00davi_djvu.txt
Long but interesting, particularly section 33+ where it specifically looks at
"THE ORIGIN AND MEANING OF THE NAMES CALIFORNIA AND CALAFIA, AND ASSOCIATED NAMES, IN LAS SERGAS DE ESPLANDIAN AND AMADIS DE GAULA."
Check it out.
I beleive you are mistaken.
The origin of the state name, Texas, is from the word, "Tejas", which means 'friends' in the Caddo language.
(from wikipedia, but it is cited, and is confirmed elsewhere.)
Further, it is used as a greeting. So the "hello friends" interpretation is reasonable.
I have the Macbook Pro, not the newer Pro, but by way of analogy compare Apple's reversible magnetic power cable vs. everyone else's barrel plugs. Apple does a lot of little things better on their computers.
Meh, I have a macbook pro too, but I'm more than a little non-plussed by the newest one... no ethernet without dongle is a joke in a pro level product. But on the upside its the first time they've finally had the sense to put a video port on it that anyone actually will be able to use without an adapter. (Mine has mini-displayport... I have encountered the ability to use it with someone elses equipment without an adapter that I brought myself exactly 0 times.)
So yeah, I like the magsafe adapter a lot, but I wouldn't say Apple does a lot of little things better. They seem to have their head up their ass just as much as the others.
As for the comparison, its meaningless. The number of people who would need or could need those mac specs is vanishingly small.
Lets look at a mac that compares to my current workstation. Oh. No. Can't do that Apple doesn't make one at all.
The mac mini is woefully under powered compared to my desktop. The imac gets closer, but still falls well short in key areas that can't be upgraded. The Mac Pro... ok that hits it out of the park... but its overkill and has a price to match.
THAT is the problem. Lots of perfectly normal people need and want to exceed the limitations of a mac mini or imac but jumping into a mac pro is absurd.
To use a car analogy Apple makes a VW Golf Hatchback (mac mini), a VW Jetta Sedan (imac), and an 18 wheel semi tractor trailer (mac pro).
Lots of people out there need or want something with more power and capacity than a Jetta or Golf but they need a semi tractor like they need another hole in their head. Does apple make a pickup truck? an SUV? Nope. Yet lots of people want those sorts of vehicle.
It was however a generation+ behind state of the art despite charging state of the art prices for most years 2007 onwards.
Its actually pretty interesting to read where the various state names originated. People don't really think about them, but its almost invariably not nearly all that ... impressive.
Half a dozen at least are named for Kings and Queens (Carolinas, Georgia, Louisiana, Virginias...) New York is named for the Duke of York. Kind of amusing the names stuck what with the revolution and all.
Indiana is roughly 'land of indians'
Oklahoma is literally 'red person' in a native dialect
Caliornia is 'hot oven' in spanish
Vermont is 'green mountain' in french
And perhaps most amusing Texas amusingly is "hello friend'.
With only minor changes in history, we could have had a nuclear superpower named roughly "The Republic of Hey Buddy"
Names are funny things. :p
Some children have baby monitors in their room from birth, gps trackers by the time they are toddlers if not before. They graduate to playing with an tablet that starts collecting information on them by 4 or 5, and a few more years after that and they've got a cell phone tracking nearly every move and social interaction.
Maybe not you or your children. But its absolutely true that full surveillance from birth is a thing now.
As parents its an interesting conundrum choosing between the security of a toddler gps and the knowledge that doing so actively prevents your child from ever being properly alone or even possibly lost. And as parents, I feel that as terrifying as that is for both child and parent, the possibility of being lost is a NECESSARY part of growing up and being an independent responsible person. They need that sense of being able to get lost; even if they don't actually get lost.
We elected not to track the kids, and to give them more space than many of their peers have.
But I know of many families where the kids have no real privacy at all, ever. If they write in their diary, their parents will have read it. If they have a box they keep special things in their parents will have have rooted through it.
I wouldn't be above searching their room and belongings if I had a concern, but I'd have to have a genuine concern to do that invasion of privacy. I think all kids need *some* privacy, and increasingly more as they get older, and many do not get it.
But whenever they've gone outside to play and they've wandered off with friends or whatever and aren't where they are supposed to be and forgot to check in with us... well... I completely get the fear that rises up and leads some parents to go what i think is completely overboard.
I appreciate what Snowden is saying, but perhaps fewer narcissistic platitudes and more documents on the front pages? Snowden isn't Jesus, the more he toots "It's not about me", the more it becomes about him
Is Snowden looking for the limelight, or is the media just hanging on his every word. Because really there's not really that much of him exposed, he doesn't say all that much at all. But there is a lot of exposure of what little there is. I think the media not Snowden should take the brunt of your distaste.
Hopefully he has the good sense not to make this about him. But I don't expect him to live a disconnected hermit life to avoid others trying to make it about him.
When someone shows up to work over-dressed, I immediately think he's compensating for lack of skill.
There is the "norm". Ie. people who are dressed appropriately to the norm.
This article is referring to people who are UNDER dressed relative to the norm and suggests that that in some circumstances this can confer additional 'status' onto them. Their primary examples appear to be harvard profs and facebook CEOs.
You are talking about people who are OVER dressed relative to the norm, which is sort of beside the point.
I think the obvious message is, if people see someoe in authority of flouts social norms, it must be, because they are so talented, social norms don't apply.
This is spot on. But the article is only looking at one side of the coin. I consider dressing to the norms in most environments to be a sign of respect to the other people -- so showing up under-dressed and being able to "get away with it" may be some sort of demonstration of status... but at the same time it's likely to lower my estimation of you. I dress very casually for work, but will dress up for certain meetings not because I need to but out of respect for the people I'm meeting with and the event.
So Zuckerberg showing up at something in a jeans and hoodie just reinforces my negative impression of him as someone who just doesn't respect anyone else around him. An impression that started with him hoovering student profiles into the initial facebook without their consent and that has only been solidified since then. So while I recognize that he can get away with it, it doesn't raise my estimation of him as a person in the least.
University profs ... I'm not really sure where that's coming from. That was the full range; from shorts and sandals with a beard to clean shaven suits. There was maybe some correlation with subject matter -- the business related electives I took (Economics, Organizational Behaviour and Psychology, etc) were more likely to be taught by suits than programming language and compiler design, but there really wasn't a correlation with tenure. The "norm" at university was that the profs generally wore whatever the hell they liked and were comfortable with. And the same went for the students. I certainly didn't dress up for lectures, and I didn't expect them to dress up for me.
Everyone was more or less beyond correlating image with competency. Maybe that was just my university experience. Maybe harvard is different.
Not quite.
They denied a "secret contract" to incorporate a known flawed RNG into BSAFE.
They did NOT deny a secret contract to incorporate DRBG.
If they did not know, at the time they made the deal that the RNG was flawed, then they could truthfully claim they did not knowingly take money to incorporate a known flawed RNG.
The pedant in me would like them to categorically deny any link between the $10million and incorporating Dual EC DBRG.
They didn't actually do that.
Given just how much scrutiny they KNEW their statement would be put under; and the fact that their lawyers would have reviewed the thing before it going up, it is striking that so many news sources are identifying it as a dodge rather than a head o denial.
Here's another article...
http://www.theverge.com/2013/12/23/5237788/rsa-nsa-backdoor-non-denial
Its hard to believe, again, given just how much scrutiny they KNEW their statement would be under, that the lack of certainty was anything but calculated.
Do they categorically deny taking a 10 million dollar payment from the NSA?
No. On that all they said was they "don't divulge details".
Do they categorically deny they incorporated Dual EC DRBG random number generator into its BSAFE encryption libraries?
No. They can't deny that. Because its clearly something they did in fact do.
Do they categorically deny they took 10 million dollars from the NSA to incorporate Dual EC DRBG into BSAFE?
Well... again.. no, not really. They categorically deny they ever intended to weaken products or incorporate known flaws.
Basically all they are categorically deny is that they KNEW what they were doing. Here's a decent article on it...
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20131222/23532125671/rsas-denial-concerning-10-million-nsa-to-promote-broken-crypto-not-really-denial-all.shtml
Me, I havent' seen the documents alleging the connection bewtween 10M and setting Dual EC DRBG as default in BSAFE... and I would dearly like to see how much of a smoking gun it really is.
In my case; its about the same as a house.
In any sort of real emergency, I presume the fire department would just break in. The condo I'm in now is are duplex and row-home style units so its pretty much exactly like houses.
But my previous condos were 'apartment style' and there was no master keys their either; and I presume they'd just break the door down.
In a non emergency, they notify the owners in advance or coordinate with them if its just a particular unit, and its up to the owners to let them in. A good recent example of a mandatory check is the annual inspection of the smoke detectors and sprinkler systems. The strata and management company picks a day, sends out a notice and the inspectors come out, and its up to the owners to let them in or make arrangements to let them in. (Usually there's someone on strata available that you can leave a key with for the day, or you can leave it with your neighbor, etc...)
Any units that they can't gain access too on the original day, get picked up on a subsequent day, coordinated directly with the owner(s) that got missed, and at those owners expense.
Its never happened that an owner has refused or been totally uncooperative with these checks; however my understanding is that we need these inspections to meet bylaw as well as insurance requirements. I'm honestly not sure what would happen if an owner refused to cooperate; whether it would or could be escalated to the police to force the issue, or what...?
If he's got a condo, the superintendent has a key for emergency purposes.
I don't know if you mean something different by "condo"; but I've lived in a couple and live in one now, and there is no 'superindentent'. There is a strata corporation with a president and council who are elected from the owners, a 3rd party management company who provides some legal services, and a variety of contracts with trades... but nobody has a key to all the units. Hell, most owners re-key them as a matter of course when they buy them.
As it is, the people living in large states are hostage to the small states.
Balanced by the fact that small states are hostage to the big states in Congress. Check and Balances...
At least that was the idea, as it stands now, the whole country is perpetually hostage to a few swing states.
The Wikipedia link you provided actually says:
The vehicle does not have a transmission, only a single speed fixed gear with a 9.73:1 reduction ratio.
Not sure where that leaves us exactly; I guess it depends on your definition of transmission. :)
Is it clear that the malicious urls actually hosted different payloads? Or did MSE and McAffee just get hammered by same virus strain 30 times?
I realize that if a strain is common and being missed that it's a big deal, but it does distort the picture greatly if they just keep testing the same "gap" in security over and over again.
There is also the question of what some of this stuff is and whether or not its even within MSE's purview. Kapersky Internet Security and NIS etc are full system protection -- they get into your email, they run your firewall, etc. In other words I don't expect MSE to block "threats" that are outside its functional scope. (And in exchange for that MSE has never completely effed up my ability to receive email... something NIS does on a regular basis.)