Probably because they don' think that security is really that critical to them. However, for many others, the cost of getting the right consultants and infrastructure might be too much for their business to handle. Most businesses don't have a lot of disposable cash that they can put into IT infrastructure, especially since a lot of IT infrastructure has to be upgraded on a semi-regular basis.
Why is it easy for me to get a new credit line of some sort? I should have to go into a bank with at least two forms of state ID, and fill out the paperwork in front of an employee of the bank instead of being able to just mail out a form with no ID other than a SSN and a wink.
The financial institutions need this easy ability to shove credit down people's throats because the cost of doing it right isn't nearly as profitable. However, it is a lot safer and would solve a lot of the problems that banks have with security.
Considering the advocacy of left-wing politics so common in Hollywood, it puts a big smile on my face to see people disregarding the IP rights of Hollywood studios. There is something disgustingly hypocritical about an industry where many of the leading lights lionize men like Fidel Castro and his revolution, and then demand respect for their property rights. It's like a bastardization of the Simpsons episode where the aliens take over both parties: Communism for some, property rights for others.
It's not fair that there are men who are by nature able to get far more physically fit than I ever could without using steroids. It's not fair that there are people who have better minds than I do.
But then again, life's not fair. You can either be happy with what you have, or spend your time moping like a 2 year old that it's not fair that someone is better than you can ever be at something. Given the effects of most of any type of "performance enhancing drugs" why would you ever lose sleep over being beaten by someone who uses them? Give them 20-30 years of use and see if they're still all that.
Because of the number of people not paying for copyrighted works, and actually calling that "fair use," these organizations have potent propaganda at their disposal. Downloading songs off of P2P networks is not fair use. It's copyright infringement, but don't tell many geeks and nerds that it's something other than "sticking it to the man."
I predicted a while ago that this sort of bullshit would come back to haunt us, and now they are using the redefined "fair use" against legitimate fair use.
What will be interesting is to see how far Google will go to "not be evil" with this. Will they allow open source developers to reimplement all of their APIs and distribute them? How about if Amazon provides a compatibility layer to allow Google App Engine software to run on top of their offerings.
That'll be the test to see how scary Google really is.
I don't get cautious around most black people, but you better believe I get cautious around ones that look like they've bought into the thug culture. Is that paranoid? How do I know that they aren't in fact some wannabe gangbanger? Saying "don't judge a book by its cover" toward people is irrational. Appearances are one of the most effective ways to gauge what sort of person you are dealing with.
Too many of the people that they'd want who are freakishly good at networking probably have a criminal record long enough to deter them from ever holding a TS, let alone a TS/SCI.
I would hazard to guess that the reason that China is able to keep its black hats at bay is the ability of their government to make you disappear in the middle of the night and wake up the next day in a labor camp if they even suspect you of compromising government systems.
I was confused there. I could have sworn that creating a risk-averse society was going to lead to a more daring and entrepeneurial economy, a government with balls of steel that stands up for the principles its society claims to hold dear, and a society of people who are independent and capable of functioning on their own without cradle-to-grave hand holding.
Of course the greater issue is how we got down this path in the first place. People don't want to admit it, but it's the feminization of society. It is offensive to modern values to suggest such a thing, but simple observation will show you that the outrage over these restrictions is far more common and fiercer in men than women. Women may disagree with the excesses, but they don't disagree with the principle nearly as much as men do because as voting records have shown countless times in many countries, women tend to value security over freedom. Ever wonder why most libertarians tend to be men?
I'm not trying to bash women here, I'm just saying that society as a whole has taken on an overtly feminized aura to it. There is no balance anymore, the way there used to be.
By rejection of luck and chance, I am referring to the Reformed belief that nothing happens randomly. It happens because God has either ordained it, or allowed it. There is nothing that fails to go through that review process.
My Christian faith makes me just shrug this off, and say "go ahead" to the scientists. As a Protestant, I believe that the fate of mankind and the Earth is in God's hands, not our own, and that God would never allow His plan to be stopped by human efforts, including scientific experiments.
Part of what enabled the explosion of science in Christian Europe was Reformed Protestant theology. Reformed Protestants reject concepts like luck, chance and superstition on the theological grounds that the represent restrictions on God's sovereignty.
is that you end up making short cuts to bring products to market as quickly as the public demands with software.
It also doesn't help that software rarely has a chance to mature into a known quantity before it is tossed out for something new.
I've been tasked to junk systems that weren't perfect, but that worked well enough to get the job done because the customer was pissy about them. Rather than tell their people to get over it, they wanted something new.
And lo and behold, you might say "meet the new system, same as the old system" because they traded one not perfect system for another not perfect system that had its own new issues.
I confess to being totally ignorant of how patents affect most industries, but it seems to me that the real problem with patents in IT is the fact that they grant such long protection for products with such short shelf lives. Several years ago, I tried to explain that to my congresscritter at the time, but he couldn't grok how his argument that we need to protect IT because it is so rapid at innovation actually is an argument AGAINST many aspects of strong IP law as they apply to IT-related products. For example, granting 17 years or more of protection to a video codec means that you own it for its natural life, plus 5-10 years in many cases.
IMO, patents should cover the schematics of a product, not the ideas that went into the product. A car maker should be able to patent the final design of their latest product, but there should be nothing stopping someone from looking at it, and extending it in some meaningful direction without compensating them. All innovation is, after all, built on someone else's ideas.
Get your biggest competitor for bandwidth to spend all of their money on the spectrum you don't want by executing a feint in that direction, and then taking over the spectrum you really wanted.
It's almost like someone who reads those business books that are based on military strategy actually figured out how to apply the military concepts to competition...
OK, one last time, democracy and freedom have no inherent connection to one another. What you want is a liberal, accountable government which would make you a "liberty advocate," not a "democracy advocate."
I could care less about the "state of democracy" in America. What I want is the state of the Constitution, something that often is sacrificed by public approval.
My instincts on this are more of "how would a criminal or terrorist" behave in this setting" because I grew up in a law enforcement family (both parents plus extended family). I've made a few "regular people" upset in the past by pointing out the idiocy of their evacuation plans to them in pointed detail. One example comes from high school when the school shootings were just starting to disappear from the news.
Our school gets a bomb threat, and the teachers and administrators are freaked out. They move us all, I kid you not, to the football field where we are fenced in by chain link fence, about 1/3 of which is covered by barbed wire. So I point out to my history teacher, one of the only genuinely intelligent public school teachers I have ever met that we had been corralled into an enclosed area, surrounded by strong sniper nests (there were many points where a shooter with a 30.06 and a few mags could have unloaded with impunity), and that ironically, if there were a bomb, and the person who planted it were clever, they'd have put it under the bleachers where about 200-300 of us were sitting.
He nodded his head in agreement that were this a real thing, we'd probably be fucked because of our administrators' plan, but the one or two regular teachers not far away who overheard acted like I was the real danger for pointing out what should been "the obvious" about this plan. Me? I'd have called in the buses, and shipped everyone off property to be safe right away.
How many people leave their network names unchanged from the defaults? I don't think you can go into most neighborhoods and not find a "linksys" or "belkin54g" or something to that effect, especially one that's open.
You know what Ayn Rand said about the government eventually having to make criminals, right?
I'm 24, my section manager is 37 and my department manager is 44.
When my department manager called design meetings on products he wanted to design, I frequently shot down his ideas.
Why?
Because they're so bad that a 24 year old with 2 years out of college can pick them up with just a spot check from looking at his ideas. I can't disclose the details for the usual reasons, but suffice it to say that the ideas ranged from "no one would buy it because no one could use it" to "you might get our customers arrested for trying to market a product that can evade European telecommunication laws."
Let me tell you, it's hard working someone who is nearly twice your age, makes probably 3 times more than you do, and you know has no freakin' idea about how to design a product and get it out there to the customer, especially when he originally came from a technical background. It's hard because of the fact that everytime you interact with them, you feel like you are in a twilight zone where competence varies directly with youth.
Here's a fact, that hopefully people will learn someday. There is little connection between age and wisdom. Age will in fact make those who lack wisdom even worse because it gives them time to compound their foolishness.
Give each state government the ability to divide up this block among at least two wireless Internet providers. The catch is that they must be able to mimick with wireless internet service, at a minimum the service coverage, in that state, of the cell phone network.
Doing that would automatically add two major competitors to the broadband market for most states, and it would make this band of spectrum more useful to the public.
But then again, the FCC was not created to serve the public, now was it? It was designed to allow "good corporate stewardship" of national wireless resources.
I wonder how many Americans actually know that the CIA has absolutely no legal jurisdiction to spy on the American people. In order for it to spy on the American people, it has to break a whole host of laws.
The FBI, one of the most thuggish law enforcement agencies in the United States, however, has quite a lot of ability to spy on you.
The truth is, the people likely to be spying on you, are the people who should scare you because they are law enforcement, not spooks.
I love the shock on others' faces when they say "I have nothing to hide," and I respond, there is no innocence in the sight of an evil man with power. This is especially amusing when I point it out to other Christians, generally who support Bush and "strong-on-this-or-that" policies. There is nothing worse than an evil man with unchecked power because when his attention turns to you, he will, by nature, try to turn every good you have done into an evil thing in order to enjoy his power.
Moderate as flamebait any non-political satire site that uses the terms 'moonbat' or 'wingnut' or other words, as they evolve, in the main article more than once.
Punishing people by calling them a troll for repeatedly referring to everyone they even remotely disagree with would help the public discourse. There are wingnuts, like the Phelps clan, but the majority of Evangelical Christians are not wingnuts. By the same token, many of the professional left-wing activist groups like Code Pink are worthy of being called 'moonbats,' but the average leftist you talk to doesn't deserve that label.
Just stop expecting support from developers. If your old, non-compliant browser doesn't render new sites well, blame it on yourself for not upgrading.
I've had this situation with people and their cars. I've known older people who think I'm insane for buying a new car and driving it till it's got 150K miles, and then dumping it. All they focus on is the depreciation when it rolls off the dealer's lot. But then, these same people will drive an older, used car that they can afford to replace until crazy things like the key won't flip on the ignition because the teeth are all worn down to the point of being useless.
So I say it's nice that you're not an early adopter. Just be rational about replacing what you use.
Slashdot Mirror
Probably because they don' think that security is really that critical to them. However, for many others, the cost of getting the right consultants and infrastructure might be too much for their business to handle. Most businesses don't have a lot of disposable cash that they can put into IT infrastructure, especially since a lot of IT infrastructure has to be upgraded on a semi-regular basis.
Why is it easy for me to get a new credit line of some sort? I should have to go into a bank with at least two forms of state ID, and fill out the paperwork in front of an employee of the bank instead of being able to just mail out a form with no ID other than a SSN and a wink.
The financial institutions need this easy ability to shove credit down people's throats because the cost of doing it right isn't nearly as profitable. However, it is a lot safer and would solve a lot of the problems that banks have with security.
Considering the advocacy of left-wing politics so common in Hollywood, it puts a big smile on my face to see people disregarding the IP rights of Hollywood studios. There is something disgustingly hypocritical about an industry where many of the leading lights lionize men like Fidel Castro and his revolution, and then demand respect for their property rights. It's like a bastardization of the Simpsons episode where the aliens take over both parties: Communism for some, property rights for others.
It's not fair that there are men who are by nature able to get far more physically fit than I ever could without using steroids. It's not fair that there are people who have better minds than I do.
But then again, life's not fair. You can either be happy with what you have, or spend your time moping like a 2 year old that it's not fair that someone is better than you can ever be at something. Given the effects of most of any type of "performance enhancing drugs" why would you ever lose sleep over being beaten by someone who uses them? Give them 20-30 years of use and see if they're still all that.
Because of the number of people not paying for copyrighted works, and actually calling that "fair use," these organizations have potent propaganda at their disposal. Downloading songs off of P2P networks is not fair use. It's copyright infringement, but don't tell many geeks and nerds that it's something other than "sticking it to the man." I predicted a while ago that this sort of bullshit would come back to haunt us, and now they are using the redefined "fair use" against legitimate fair use.
What will be interesting is to see how far Google will go to "not be evil" with this. Will they allow open source developers to reimplement all of their APIs and distribute them? How about if Amazon provides a compatibility layer to allow Google App Engine software to run on top of their offerings. That'll be the test to see how scary Google really is.
I don't get cautious around most black people, but you better believe I get cautious around ones that look like they've bought into the thug culture. Is that paranoid? How do I know that they aren't in fact some wannabe gangbanger? Saying "don't judge a book by its cover" toward people is irrational. Appearances are one of the most effective ways to gauge what sort of person you are dealing with.
Too many of the people that they'd want who are freakishly good at networking probably have a criminal record long enough to deter them from ever holding a TS, let alone a TS/SCI.
I would hazard to guess that the reason that China is able to keep its black hats at bay is the ability of their government to make you disappear in the middle of the night and wake up the next day in a labor camp if they even suspect you of compromising government systems.
I was confused there. I could have sworn that creating a risk-averse society was going to lead to a more daring and entrepeneurial economy, a government with balls of steel that stands up for the principles its society claims to hold dear, and a society of people who are independent and capable of functioning on their own without cradle-to-grave hand holding.
Of course the greater issue is how we got down this path in the first place. People don't want to admit it, but it's the feminization of society. It is offensive to modern values to suggest such a thing, but simple observation will show you that the outrage over these restrictions is far more common and fiercer in men than women. Women may disagree with the excesses, but they don't disagree with the principle nearly as much as men do because as voting records have shown countless times in many countries, women tend to value security over freedom. Ever wonder why most libertarians tend to be men?
I'm not trying to bash women here, I'm just saying that society as a whole has taken on an overtly feminized aura to it. There is no balance anymore, the way there used to be.
By rejection of luck and chance, I am referring to the Reformed belief that nothing happens randomly. It happens because God has either ordained it, or allowed it. There is nothing that fails to go through that review process.
My Christian faith makes me just shrug this off, and say "go ahead" to the scientists. As a Protestant, I believe that the fate of mankind and the Earth is in God's hands, not our own, and that God would never allow His plan to be stopped by human efforts, including scientific experiments.
Part of what enabled the explosion of science in Christian Europe was Reformed Protestant theology. Reformed Protestants reject concepts like luck, chance and superstition on the theological grounds that the represent restrictions on God's sovereignty.
is that you end up making short cuts to bring products to market as quickly as the public demands with software.
It also doesn't help that software rarely has a chance to mature into a known quantity before it is tossed out for something new.
I've been tasked to junk systems that weren't perfect, but that worked well enough to get the job done because the customer was pissy about them. Rather than tell their people to get over it, they wanted something new.
And lo and behold, you might say "meet the new system, same as the old system" because they traded one not perfect system for another not perfect system that had its own new issues.
I confess to being totally ignorant of how patents affect most industries, but it seems to me that the real problem with patents in IT is the fact that they grant such long protection for products with such short shelf lives. Several years ago, I tried to explain that to my congresscritter at the time, but he couldn't grok how his argument that we need to protect IT because it is so rapid at innovation actually is an argument AGAINST many aspects of strong IP law as they apply to IT-related products. For example, granting 17 years or more of protection to a video codec means that you own it for its natural life, plus 5-10 years in many cases.
IMO, patents should cover the schematics of a product, not the ideas that went into the product. A car maker should be able to patent the final design of their latest product, but there should be nothing stopping someone from looking at it, and extending it in some meaningful direction without compensating them. All innovation is, after all, built on someone else's ideas.
Get your biggest competitor for bandwidth to spend all of their money on the spectrum you don't want by executing a feint in that direction, and then taking over the spectrum you really wanted.
It's almost like someone who reads those business books that are based on military strategy actually figured out how to apply the military concepts to competition...
You will probably never see a major corporation admit that patents are largely become just a form of rent-seeking than this.
OK, one last time, democracy and freedom have no inherent connection to one another. What you want is a liberal, accountable government which would make you a "liberty advocate," not a "democracy advocate."
I could care less about the "state of democracy" in America. What I want is the state of the Constitution, something that often is sacrificed by public approval.
GET OFF MY HOMEPAGE!!!
My instincts on this are more of "how would a criminal or terrorist" behave in this setting" because I grew up in a law enforcement family (both parents plus extended family). I've made a few "regular people" upset in the past by pointing out the idiocy of their evacuation plans to them in pointed detail. One example comes from high school when the school shootings were just starting to disappear from the news.
Our school gets a bomb threat, and the teachers and administrators are freaked out. They move us all, I kid you not, to the football field where we are fenced in by chain link fence, about 1/3 of which is covered by barbed wire. So I point out to my history teacher, one of the only genuinely intelligent public school teachers I have ever met that we had been corralled into an enclosed area, surrounded by strong sniper nests (there were many points where a shooter with a 30.06 and a few mags could have unloaded with impunity), and that ironically, if there were a bomb, and the person who planted it were clever, they'd have put it under the bleachers where about 200-300 of us were sitting.
He nodded his head in agreement that were this a real thing, we'd probably be fucked because of our administrators' plan, but the one or two regular teachers not far away who overheard acted like I was the real danger for pointing out what should been "the obvious" about this plan. Me? I'd have called in the buses, and shipped everyone off property to be safe right away.
How many people leave their network names unchanged from the defaults? I don't think you can go into most neighborhoods and not find a "linksys" or "belkin54g" or something to that effect, especially one that's open.
You know what Ayn Rand said about the government eventually having to make criminals, right?
I'm 24, my section manager is 37 and my department manager is 44.
When my department manager called design meetings on products he wanted to design, I frequently shot down his ideas.
Why?
Because they're so bad that a 24 year old with 2 years out of college can pick them up with just a spot check from looking at his ideas. I can't disclose the details for the usual reasons, but suffice it to say that the ideas ranged from "no one would buy it because no one could use it" to "you might get our customers arrested for trying to market a product that can evade European telecommunication laws."
Let me tell you, it's hard working someone who is nearly twice your age, makes probably 3 times more than you do, and you know has no freakin' idea about how to design a product and get it out there to the customer, especially when he originally came from a technical background. It's hard because of the fact that everytime you interact with them, you feel like you are in a twilight zone where competence varies directly with youth.
Here's a fact, that hopefully people will learn someday. There is little connection between age and wisdom. Age will in fact make those who lack wisdom even worse because it gives them time to compound their foolishness.
Give each state government the ability to divide up this block among at least two wireless Internet providers. The catch is that they must be able to mimick with wireless internet service, at a minimum the service coverage, in that state, of the cell phone network.
Doing that would automatically add two major competitors to the broadband market for most states, and it would make this band of spectrum more useful to the public.
But then again, the FCC was not created to serve the public, now was it? It was designed to allow "good corporate stewardship" of national wireless resources.
I wonder how many Americans actually know that the CIA has absolutely no legal jurisdiction to spy on the American people. In order for it to spy on the American people, it has to break a whole host of laws.
The FBI, one of the most thuggish law enforcement agencies in the United States, however, has quite a lot of ability to spy on you.
The truth is, the people likely to be spying on you, are the people who should scare you because they are law enforcement, not spooks.
I love the shock on others' faces when they say "I have nothing to hide," and I respond, there is no innocence in the sight of an evil man with power. This is especially amusing when I point it out to other Christians, generally who support Bush and "strong-on-this-or-that" policies. There is nothing worse than an evil man with unchecked power because when his attention turns to you, he will, by nature, try to turn every good you have done into an evil thing in order to enjoy his power.
Moderate as flamebait any non-political satire site that uses the terms 'moonbat' or 'wingnut' or other words, as they evolve, in the main article more than once.
Punishing people by calling them a troll for repeatedly referring to everyone they even remotely disagree with would help the public discourse. There are wingnuts, like the Phelps clan, but the majority of Evangelical Christians are not wingnuts. By the same token, many of the professional left-wing activist groups like Code Pink are worthy of being called 'moonbats,' but the average leftist you talk to doesn't deserve that label.
Just stop expecting support from developers. If your old, non-compliant browser doesn't render new sites well, blame it on yourself for not upgrading. I've had this situation with people and their cars. I've known older people who think I'm insane for buying a new car and driving it till it's got 150K miles, and then dumping it. All they focus on is the depreciation when it rolls off the dealer's lot. But then, these same people will drive an older, used car that they can afford to replace until crazy things like the key won't flip on the ignition because the teeth are all worn down to the point of being useless. So I say it's nice that you're not an early adopter. Just be rational about replacing what you use.