You'd be surprised how fucking hard it can get though, after even the most basic of security constraints are put in place.
I have access to offices in multiple countries globally and I still can't get into a specific part of one of our local offices, because the team in there have deep access to very sensitive data.
That team are not trusted with that access. They're monitored, audited, logged and educated. They're vetted when they're hired, and know that they aren't trusted.
They don't leave because they respect the need for these measures, they understand the damage that an information leak could cause and they appreciate the protection these processes gives to them - they wont get prosecuted or imprisoned for leaking data because there's some serious evidence to demonstrate that they didn't and couldn't.
Of course, no information is 100% secure and still accessible, so they pootentially _could_ leak data, but it'd need to be a seriously thought through and targeted attack, and even then there's a very strong likelihood of detection and subsequent action. Which would indeed include criminal prosecution.
It would also need an understanding of the defences in depth around that information, which is one of the things we don't trust that team with. The data is sensitive, but I'm not sure it's worth embedding a full team of people across different roles in the organisation to access - anybody with those resources tends to have more direct mechanisms, such as sending in the police with a court order.
You can be tight without being a complete twat about it.
I know law firms are full of people professionally trained to be utter cunts but that doesn't have to extend to the IT staff. I work for a company with severely more stringent information security requirements than a law firm and we do this scary thing called making it a great place to work.
Most people in the UK (and I'd guess the rest of the EU) have a personal telephone with them even when at work, so it's very possible to contact people through telephony without using any company equipment at all.
Although of course, most phones these days allow use of private email too, so it's odd to suggest ringing people you want to email..
Well, no, not end of story at all. The story includes regulatory compliance, which covers things like protecting consumer data, fiduciary responsibility, obligations against modern slavery and various audit controls.
Failing to monitor work email accounts is in some situations actually illegal.
What, like Netscape when it was first released? Like Opera when it was first released? Like Firebird when it was first released? Like Chrome when it was first released?
Yeah, these niche browsers with their zero market share. They'll never make it.
These are the same fuckwits who take pictures of their FUCKING FOOD and their dogs wearing tiny sweaters or moose antlers or little red noses, which I'm sure those animals HATE and sharing them with their so-called "friends," who are also morons, evidently because they don't immediately unfriend the jackasses who do this shit, and move on with their lives.
So I prevented harm to myself and my precious cameras by NOT pointing them at or near a giant ball of fire in the sky.
So, erm, what do you take photographs of? Or do you prevent harm to your precious cameras by keeping them safely in a closed, locked box at the bottom of wardrobe in the bricked off spare room in the basement of your secret bunker?
Wait? You've been working at least a decade, so you must have worked with hundreds of men. And you've found four examples? And still haven't been able to demonstrate that they have any inadequacies?
Fucking hell, ring the universities! We need to produce a paper on this now!
Incidentally, what the fuck is with bullying men that don't share your perspective on what's important with life? You appear to be horrified that some men aren't giving three quarters of their income to a woman, and apparently they're the one that's inadequate? No. If you really don't hate men, then perhaps try fucking understanding them from time to time.
guys who are inept at interacting with others, especially with women. That there are fewer women is secretly, to them, a huge bonus. Far fewer reminders of their inadequacies, of what they can't have
You feel like backing that up with any evidence, any fucking evidence at all?
Just that it sounds like rabid man-hating stupidity, rather than anything based on boring mundane things like facts.
The NHS provides an excellent level of healthcare.
It is possible to get marginally better outcomes if you pay insane sums of money but that's true in the UK and the US. In the UK you get close to those margins for no extra cash; in rhe US sizeable numbers of people can't afford to get anywhere near.
Checked life expectancy in the two countries lately?
Agreed. I've taken photographs of children and posted them online. It's perfectly legal, along with photographing the police. I take pictures of them exactly because they tried to prosecute people for it and got a spanking.
As for candid photography.. it's my favourite sort. Street mostly, but also events.
I didn't buy any eclipse protecting glasses and I'm not even in the US, and I heard about the recall.
But it is possible, however unlikely, that someone that bought glasses and was emailed by Amazon about the recall did manage to miss that email, miss the media coverage and also be stupid enough to stare at the sun through their shitty glasses.
So I wouldn't want to predict the outcome of this legal action at all.
You may want to slow down and read carefully. It's amazing how much this might help you understand what was actually written, rather than what you thought was written.
T-shirts are already scarily cheap. You can get an adult t-shirt in the colour of choice for a quid, including postage.
It may wear out after 30-40 times wearing it, but given that quid includes the raw materials, the packaging to the warehouse, the packaging to my house, the transport of the raw materials to the factory, the t-shirt to the warehouse, the t-shirt to me, and also someone picking it out as a result of my ordering it.. knocking a cent off the cost of manufacture doesn't help at the retail side of things.
Manufacturer a few million t-shirts though, and it's a nice contribution.
But the charge for accepting Mastercard is set by Mastercard, not by the card issuer. So the cost to the merchant for accepting the paypal card or another mastercard card.
So no price rises as a result of this specific card..
Gouging 3% of 2% means they're still giving you 1.94% cashback, and that's assuming that you don't just transfer the cashback to your main bank account.
Their revenue stream will be the increased use of the Paypal lending itself, so hopefully millions of people will take this card and still not use Paypal and put the corrupt fuckers out of business.
Slashdot Mirror
there's too many other ways to get the data out
You'd be surprised how fucking hard it can get though, after even the most basic of security constraints are put in place.
I have access to offices in multiple countries globally and I still can't get into a specific part of one of our local offices, because the team in there have deep access to very sensitive data.
That team are not trusted with that access. They're monitored, audited, logged and educated. They're vetted when they're hired, and know that they aren't trusted.
They don't leave because they respect the need for these measures, they understand the damage that an information leak could cause and they appreciate the protection these processes gives to them - they wont get prosecuted or imprisoned for leaking data because there's some serious evidence to demonstrate that they didn't and couldn't.
Of course, no information is 100% secure and still accessible, so they pootentially _could_ leak data, but it'd need to be a seriously thought through and targeted attack, and even then there's a very strong likelihood of detection and subsequent action. Which would indeed include criminal prosecution.
It would also need an understanding of the defences in depth around that information, which is one of the things we don't trust that team with. The data is sensitive, but I'm not sure it's worth embedding a full team of people across different roles in the organisation to access - anybody with those resources tends to have more direct mechanisms, such as sending in the police with a court order.
You can be tight without being a complete twat about it.
I know law firms are full of people professionally trained to be utter cunts but that doesn't have to extend to the IT staff. I work for a company with severely more stringent information security requirements than a law firm and we do this scary thing called making it a great place to work.
You should consider giving it a go some time.
Most people in the UK (and I'd guess the rest of the EU) have a personal telephone with them even when at work, so it's very possible to contact people through telephony without using any company equipment at all.
Although of course, most phones these days allow use of private email too, so it's odd to suggest ringing people you want to email..
Well, no, not end of story at all. The story includes regulatory compliance, which covers things like protecting consumer data, fiduciary responsibility, obligations against modern slavery and various audit controls.
Failing to monitor work email accounts is in some situations actually illegal.
if I email my wife to let her know that I will be home late because of work I would not expect my employer to fire me for personal use of work email
You miss the point. The base assumption should be that your employer will know that you mailed your wife to let her know that you'll be home late.
Yeah, back then every single Oracle acquisition target was writing software in Java and the language was controlled by Sun and IBM.
Oracle couldn't afford IBM.
No, I discounted his solution because it lacked common sense. That doesn't make it misogynist.
What, like Netscape when it was first released?
Like Opera when it was first released?
Like Firebird when it was first released?
Like Chrome when it was first released?
Yeah, these niche browsers with their zero market share. They'll never make it.
These are the same fuckwits who take pictures of their FUCKING FOOD and their dogs wearing tiny sweaters or moose antlers or little red noses, which I'm sure those animals HATE and sharing them with their so-called "friends," who are also morons, evidently because they don't immediately unfriend the jackasses who do this shit, and move on with their lives.
So I prevented harm to myself and my precious cameras by NOT pointing them at or near a giant ball of fire in the sky.
So, erm, what do you take photographs of? Or do you prevent harm to your precious cameras by keeping them safely in a closed, locked box at the bottom of wardrobe in the bricked off spare room in the basement of your secret bunker?
They rented out almost all of their telephoto lenses and had six damaged by the sun.
That's not a lot.
No. It opens the chance of you staring at an uneclipsed sun without squinting, but in and of itself it is not more dangerous.
The reason people are warned not to look at an eclipse isn't because it's more dangerous, it's because people forget to look away.
Wait? You've been working at least a decade, so you must have worked with hundreds of men. And you've found four examples? And still haven't been able to demonstrate that they have any inadequacies?
Fucking hell, ring the universities! We need to produce a paper on this now!
Incidentally, what the fuck is with bullying men that don't share your perspective on what's important with life? You appear to be horrified that some men aren't giving three quarters of their income to a woman, and apparently they're the one that's inadequate? No. If you really don't hate men, then perhaps try fucking understanding them from time to time.
guys who are inept at interacting with others, especially with women. That there are fewer women is secretly, to them, a huge bonus. Far fewer reminders of their inadequacies, of what they can't have
You feel like backing that up with any evidence, any fucking evidence at all?
Just that it sounds like rabid man-hating stupidity, rather than anything based on boring mundane things like facts.
I'm curious, what makes you accuse him of being a "misogynistic asshole"?
I think it shows that the average Brit will live almost three years longer than the average American.
While I'd hesitate to attribute that all to the NHS I think it demonstrates that the NHS is hardly causing people to die young.
Bullshit. Basic level of healthcare my arse.
The NHS provides an excellent level of healthcare.
It is possible to get marginally better outcomes if you pay insane sums of money but that's true in the UK and the US. In the UK you get close to those margins for no extra cash; in rhe US sizeable numbers of people can't afford to get anywhere near.
Checked life expectancy in the two countries lately?
Of course you can. In the UK you use those photos commercially too, although some restrictions around logos.
Agreed. I've taken photographs of children and posted them online. It's perfectly legal, along with photographing the police. I take pictures of them exactly because they tried to prosecute people for it and got a spanking.
As for candid photography.. it's my favourite sort. Street mostly, but also events.
If I was selling perfectly capable glasses with indefinite protection I'd probably put a "Do not stare at the sun" warning on the box anyway.
I didn't buy any eclipse protecting glasses and I'm not even in the US, and I heard about the recall.
But it is possible, however unlikely, that someone that bought glasses and was emailed by Amazon about the recall did manage to miss that email, miss the media coverage and also be stupid enough to stare at the sun through their shitty glasses.
So I wouldn't want to predict the outcome of this legal action at all.
You may want to slow down and read carefully. It's amazing how much this might help you understand what was actually written, rather than what you thought was written.
T-shirts are already scarily cheap. You can get an adult t-shirt in the colour of choice for a quid, including postage.
It may wear out after 30-40 times wearing it, but given that quid includes the raw materials, the packaging to the warehouse, the packaging to my house, the transport of the raw materials to the factory, the t-shirt to the warehouse, the t-shirt to me, and also someone picking it out as a result of my ordering it.. knocking a cent off the cost of manufacture doesn't help at the retail side of things.
Manufacturer a few million t-shirts though, and it's a nice contribution.
But the charge for accepting Mastercard is set by Mastercard, not by the card issuer. So the cost to the merchant for accepting the paypal card or another mastercard card.
So no price rises as a result of this specific card..
Gouging 3% of 2% means they're still giving you 1.94% cashback, and that's assuming that you don't just transfer the cashback to your main bank account.
Their revenue stream will be the increased use of the Paypal lending itself, so hopefully millions of people will take this card and still not use Paypal and put the corrupt fuckers out of business.
So lets apply the same investigation on others too. This doesn't need to be a partisan activity, it's a way to assure compliance with tax laws.