I have to admit, I'd probably go with the cheaper car with the leak. And while I won't assume to speak for anyone but myself, my hunch is that there's a sizeable population that would do the same.
Cruel and unusual punishment. Hmm. You know, if you substitute 'creative' for 'unusual' it almost sounds ok. I mean, aren't we promoting creativity and individualism these days?
What better way to almost ensure that your site gets hacked than by using a.safe domain. Why not just call it.un.hackable? I can just read the first headline "So... you think you're.safe?"
Of course they use words like 'impossible' and 'can't be done'. What fun would it be in doing something really hard if some 'expert' hadn't said 'it can't be done'? First the experts say something is impossible, then they do it and they get more money from grants. Pretty slick if you ask me.
"It's also very secure if it's not connected to a network and no one is running unauthorized applications."
That's like saying "My car is very safe as long as I'm driving it where there is absolutely nothing to crash into and I'm not actually trying to hit anything." Please. I'm not a MS hater, but this statement is hardly a selling point.
"I will never touch anything that is even remotely connected to what MS is doing."
Then you better walk around with your hands in your pockets, 'cause they're everywhere.
'With the number of delays that we've seen in Vista's release, there's no excuse for security vendors not to have got their products right by now,' said John Hawes, technical consultant at Virus Bulletin."
Um, excuse me. There's no excuse for security vendors not to have gotten their products right by now.
pft... swine.
Where to begin? The argument regarding 'it's their parents property' is misguided. Clearly you are not a parent, or at least never should be one with that attitude. Property ownership is irrelevent. It's a parents obligation to know what their child is doing not just while using 'their property', but rather at all times. Granted, this is an impossible task, but to the extent that it is possible, it is essential. Teenagers won't like it too much citing the argument that 'it's their life' and other such things. This could't be farther from the truth. They will have a life soon enough. But up until the age of majority, it is the parent's job to provide enough freedom for the child to learn and grow so that they can learn responsability, but to be able at any time to haul in the reigns to ensure the child's safety and well-being. Your comment that "They should have thought of that before they had kids in the first place" shows the lack of caring that I believe plagues the American family today.
Slashdot Mirror
... said the mouse to the lion.
I have to admit, I'd probably go with the cheaper car with the leak. And while I won't assume to speak for anyone but myself, my hunch is that there's a sizeable population that would do the same.
Depends. Do the bread boxes have to be in a useable state when removed from the plane?
I disagree with the *initial* premise of a high-quality version of The Matrix.
It 'kept' asking? As in past tense? You don't mean... no! ... you ... KILLED him?
Yeah, I killed mine too.
Were you denied a puppy as a child?
If your intent was to come off as arrogant and offensive as possible, congratulations. Mission accomplished.
Spam is people! OMG Spam is made from PEOPLE!
->How many people have found exploits for a toaster?
Not a good example. Who writes software for a toaster? Sort of like Mac... ooh. Sorry. Never mind.
Correction: "I think people that want to do the right thing would probably buy a retail version anyhow, and everyone else will just pirate it. "
should be...
"I think the two guys that want to do the right thing would probably buy a retail version anyhow, and everyone else will just pirate it. "
Cruel and unusual punishment. Hmm. You know, if you substitute 'creative' for 'unusual' it almost sounds ok. I mean, aren't we promoting creativity and individualism these days?
The Feds giveth, the Feds taketh away.
What better way to almost ensure that your site gets hacked than by using a .safe domain. Why not just call it .un.hackable? I can just read the first headline "So... you think you're .safe?"
I dunno, but the one I had to write damn near killed me back in high school. If it is dead, then it's payback!
Ok wait...wait..I got one! Can I get a copy of the installation manual?
Solution: For God's sake, man, pull the plug!
If the dossier were written in C#, leaks would not be an issue.
Of course they use words like 'impossible' and 'can't be done'. What fun would it be in doing something really hard if some 'expert' hadn't said 'it can't be done'? First the experts say something is impossible, then they do it and they get more money from grants. Pretty slick if you ask me.
"It's also very secure if it's not connected to a network and no one is running unauthorized applications."
That's like saying "My car is very safe as long as I'm driving it where there is absolutely nothing to crash into and I'm not actually trying to hit anything." Please. I'm not a MS hater, but this statement is hardly a selling point.
"I will never touch anything that is even remotely connected to what MS is doing." Then you better walk around with your hands in your pockets, 'cause they're everywhere.
'With the number of delays that we've seen in Vista's release, there's no excuse for security vendors not to have got their products right by now,' said John Hawes, technical consultant at Virus Bulletin."
... swine.
Um, excuse me. There's no excuse for security vendors not to have gotten their products right by now.
pft
It must have hurt to say that. Well done.
Where to begin? The argument regarding 'it's their parents property' is misguided. Clearly you are not a parent, or at least never should be one with that attitude. Property ownership is irrelevent. It's a parents obligation to know what their child is doing not just while using 'their property', but rather at all times. Granted, this is an impossible task, but to the extent that it is possible, it is essential. Teenagers won't like it too much citing the argument that 'it's their life' and other such things. This could't be farther from the truth. They will have a life soon enough. But up until the age of majority, it is the parent's job to provide enough freedom for the child to learn and grow so that they can learn responsability, but to be able at any time to haul in the reigns to ensure the child's safety and well-being. Your comment that "They should have thought of that before they had kids in the first place" shows the lack of caring that I believe plagues the American family today.
ehy, I got yer megajewels right 'ear!
Man, the glass is always half empty for some people. How 'bout "IE6 was risk free for double-digit days in '06!"