And how much did they profit from selling that data?
Also, what about the person that ordered this to be done? What about the person that followed that order? "My boss told me to do it" is not a legitimate defense. What about the companies that bought the data? They should also suffer some consequences.
Part of that $2.2 million should go to a whistleblower fund, to reward people that report this sort of behavior in other companies.
Boohoo. Pay for what you use. Do you demand the power company give you unlimited electricity or the hydro company unlimited water? Bandwidth is a finite resource at any given time.
This is like saying stop complaining about the electric company dropping a phase going into your building because you're using too much electricity.
I've lived at my current location for going on 8 years. Started out with Sprint provided wireless broadband and then had to switch to a couple of other providers when Sprint sold their spectrum to another entity. Our land line at the time was provided by AT&T, but they were using an old zip code so it actually took us a month or so to get that established after we moved in. So as you can imagine the zip code issue made trying to order broadband service from AT&T fun. At first I get told service isn't available. Then months later I'm searching again and actually schedule an install only to have it cancelled. Then I finally just give up and stick with wireless broadband, but get on a notification list of AT&T for when service might be available at my house. Last Fall I get an email notifying me that not only is broadband service available now, but my house is able to get Uverse. I asked the technician who did my install what changed with the cabling in my area to open up Uverse as an option and he didn't have an answer. Said something about reconditioning the line, but who knows. Didn't make any sense to me, but I'm just happy to have wired broadband service. Thankfully things have been pretty solid and we haven't looked back . . .
My wife actually calls the parents or whoever is listed as the contact for the child anytime there is a major issue with a kid. More often than not, the parents appreciate the call and most of the time it leads to the kid behaving better.
There is no excuse for this kind of idiocy. When something is obviously not a threat to then treat it like one shows that the principal is an idiot. She should have confiscated the ring and told the kid to go back to class and behave. Actually a teacher should have handled it. How it ever got to the level it did is mind boggling. I know this kind of behavior goes on all the time because kids are kids. Most teachers and principals would have handled this without all the fuss, this time it was an idiot. Unfortunately you can't filter them all out, sometimes a few get through. They should fire her immediately and replace her with someone with some sense.
My wife teaches 1st grade and handles stuff on her own most of the time. Rarely does she actually have to get the principal involved. Usually by the time it gets to them they realize there is a real problem with the kid.
Some teachers just don't know how to handle stuff.
Well, they were SUPPOSED to follow the regs. Of course that doesn't mean they did. As you suggest, though compliance and security are not only not the same thing, but they are only very loosely coupled, of it all. In some cases we've had security regulations require the use of insecure methods, such as MD5. I spent 15 years doing security for small companies before I just recently started learning compliance with all of these "security " standards.
PCI is pretty good, though. It's not comprehensive, but it doesn't require insecurity.
There are many influences on these regulations that are intended to offer some illusion of security, but all they seem to do is increase the cost to meet them and decrease the quality of services Federal Agencies are charged with providing to the American public. The Agency I'm in is fully expected to meet these requirements as laid out by HITECH and Meaningful Use. However, the ROI is not remotely worth the effort. Let's spend millions meeting some requirement so we can increase our collections by some very small percentage. Spend millions attempting to meet some requirement that will never be met . . .
I always found it entertaining that In govt you have zero education people dictating IT and IS policies.
But it's the same way in corporate america, I have yet to meet a CIO or CTO that has a clue.
This is so true. They often ask us to interpret a policy for them and ignore it when it's an answer they don't want to hear. We (the Federal government) do a great job of setting ourselves up for failure.
Yes. But why hand out slides? Why have slides at all? You've already learned more than the slides contain; what will slides add?
If you like notes, you were taking notes during the talk - which are more useful than slides would be.
I think most folks get more out of an interactive lecture than some death by powerpoint . . . However, providing the "slides" or whatever later can allow students/participants to compare their notes with the lecture content. I have been known to miss a few points throughout a lecture and not get them written down.
Were you shocked at the vastly out-dated code used? You might be shocked at how many other web applications that in use by the Feds are based on old code/software.
I blame the unions.
The unions get their money from the teachers.
That's a fair statement. But I'm sure some teachers couldn't tell you anything about their union or their talking points.
If the teachers put a stop to it it would halt. They do not. They say they give a shit about the kids. But that is not as important as
a years pay for a few months work, full benefits for them for life and tenure.
A few month's work? That's the second time you've mentioned that. What's the deal?
You do realize that there are many teachers on 12-month contracts and that those teachers work year-round right?
That does not necessarily involve being overly paranoid and outright spying on all of their communications.
Are you saying a parent has no right to "spy" on anything their kids are doing? That's very naive . . .
Now you've excluded anyone who doesn't do so as a "good parent." No True Good Parent would tell you otherwise.
Unfortunately there are also bad parents in this world to go along with the good ones . . .
What metric are you using to determine what a true good parent is? One that sees things the way you do? Which is obviously to allow the kid to do what they want and hope they make the right choice on their own?
Because many people seem to be, in my opinion, going overboard. They're paranoid of everything and desperate to block anything they don't want their precious children seeing based on what appears to be nothing. For the children, of course.
If going overboard = me poking my nose into my daughters' lives then I'll gladly go overboard. If being paranoid = me attempting to keep them innocent and sheltered from what I deem to be inappropriate material for their age then I'll gladly be paranoid. Kids grow up fast enough today. No need to make it happen any faster.
Since I find it highly unlikely that they'll actually be affected in a negative way by the content, any age. Unless the parent has determined themselves that this specific child is negatively affected by the content. It seems to be assumed most of the time.
What if I find it very likely that my child is affected in a negative way by this content? Based on what you've been posting most parents aren't smart enough to make that determination . . .
You claimed an 8-year-old can self-regulate their XBox usage.
And they very well might be able to. But it's possible to be responsible in general without being responsible 100% of the time.
And that's the point . . . I would hope a parent would be able to better determine if their 8 year-old was behaving responsibly and know better than the 8 year-old would.
Slashdot Mirror
And how much did they profit from selling that data?
Also, what about the person that ordered this to be done? What about the person that followed that order? "My boss told me to do it" is not a legitimate defense. What about the companies that bought the data? They should also suffer some consequences.
Part of that $2.2 million should go to a whistleblower fund, to reward people that report this sort of behavior in other companies.
Exactly.
Good! Your hate has made you powerful. Now, fulfill your destiny and take Zuckerburg's place at my side!
Good grief. Can't people think for themselves? We don't need Facebook or any other social media platform censoring stuff for us.
You have to wonder how they ever solved crimes before there were smartphones
You mean before when smartphones weren't around and folks just committed crimes via payphone? :)
I guess if you're a cinephile you might find a problem with it, but then you probably wouldn't be watching on your phone.
True
Except the content keeps streaming just fine... For as long as you want. It's unlimited streaming, not unlimited bandwidth.
What good is unlimited streaming if the quality isn't that great? I've never used their service so I have no idea what it's like.
that many don't offer unlimited data at ANY price
Boohoo. Pay for what you use. Do you demand the power company give you unlimited electricity or the hydro company unlimited water? Bandwidth is a finite resource at any given time.
This is like saying stop complaining about the electric company dropping a phase going into your building because you're using too much electricity.
I've lived at my current location for going on 8 years. Started out with Sprint provided wireless broadband and then had to switch to a couple of other providers when Sprint sold their spectrum to another entity. Our land line at the time was provided by AT&T, but they were using an old zip code so it actually took us a month or so to get that established after we moved in. So as you can imagine the zip code issue made trying to order broadband service from AT&T fun. At first I get told service isn't available. Then months later I'm searching again and actually schedule an install only to have it cancelled. Then I finally just give up and stick with wireless broadband, but get on a notification list of AT&T for when service might be available at my house. Last Fall I get an email notifying me that not only is broadband service available now, but my house is able to get Uverse. I asked the technician who did my install what changed with the cabling in my area to open up Uverse as an option and he didn't have an answer. Said something about reconditioning the line, but who knows. Didn't make any sense to me, but I'm just happy to have wired broadband service. Thankfully things have been pretty solid and we haven't looked back . . .
I bet Hilary Clinton wishes this was an option for her "private" email account.
My wife actually calls the parents or whoever is listed as the contact for the child anytime there is a major issue with a kid. More often than not, the parents appreciate the call and most of the time it leads to the kid behaving better.
There is no excuse for this kind of idiocy. When something is obviously not a threat to then treat it like one shows that the principal is an idiot. She should have confiscated the ring and told the kid to go back to class and behave. Actually a teacher should have handled it. How it ever got to the level it did is mind boggling. I know this kind of behavior goes on all the time because kids are kids. Most teachers and principals would have handled this without all the fuss, this time it was an idiot. Unfortunately you can't filter them all out, sometimes a few get through. They should fire her immediately and replace her with someone with some sense.
My wife teaches 1st grade and handles stuff on her own most of the time. Rarely does she actually have to get the principal involved. Usually by the time it gets to them they realize there is a real problem with the kid. Some teachers just don't know how to handle stuff.
Well, they were SUPPOSED to follow the regs. Of course that doesn't mean they did. As you suggest, though compliance and security are not only not the same thing, but they are only very loosely coupled, of it all. In some cases we've had security regulations require the use of insecure methods, such as MD5. I spent 15 years doing security for small companies before I just recently started learning compliance with all of these "security " standards.
PCI is pretty good, though. It's not comprehensive, but it doesn't require insecurity.
There are many influences on these regulations that are intended to offer some illusion of security, but all they seem to do is increase the cost to meet them and decrease the quality of services Federal Agencies are charged with providing to the American public. The Agency I'm in is fully expected to meet these requirements as laid out by HITECH and Meaningful Use. However, the ROI is not remotely worth the effort. Let's spend millions meeting some requirement so we can increase our collections by some very small percentage. Spend millions attempting to meet some requirement that will never be met . . .
Drives me crazy.
I always found it entertaining that In govt you have zero education people dictating IT and IS policies.
But it's the same way in corporate america, I have yet to meet a CIO or CTO that has a clue.
This is so true. They often ask us to interpret a policy for them and ignore it when it's an answer they don't want to hear. We (the Federal government) do a great job of setting ourselves up for failure.
So Republicans alone have gone crazy the last decade or so. Who knew?
Why in the world would you feel any republican would think this is a bad idea?
Yes. But why hand out slides? Why have slides at all? You've already learned more than the slides contain; what will slides add?
If you like notes, you were taking notes during the talk - which are more useful than slides would be.
I think most folks get more out of an interactive lecture than some death by powerpoint . . . However, providing the "slides" or whatever later can allow students/participants to compare their notes with the lecture content. I have been known to miss a few points throughout a lecture and not get them written down.
Another $500 for ammo?
Thanks a LOT of ammo.
gotcha . . .
Were you shocked at the vastly out-dated code used? You might be shocked at how many other web applications that in use by the Feds are based on old code/software.
If you're not endangering anyone why be bothered?
I blame the unions. The unions get their money from the teachers.
That's a fair statement. But I'm sure some teachers couldn't tell you anything about their union or their talking points.
If the teachers put a stop to it it would halt. They do not. They say they give a shit about the kids. But that is not as important as a years pay for a few months work, full benefits for them for life and tenure.
A few month's work? That's the second time you've mentioned that. What's the deal?
You do realize that there are many teachers on 12-month contracts and that those teachers work year-round right?
If it doesn't matter why specifically slam teachers? Blame the school administrators, not the teachers.
I'm not sure what private schools you're referring to that could actually do anything cheaper. Please explain how it would be cheaper.
I agree that Unions forcing bad teachers to be shifted around rather than moved out is bad.
How much of the budget do you think actual classroom teachers actually manage?
How much of their own money do you think actual classroom teachers spend each year?
That does not necessarily involve being overly paranoid and outright spying on all of their communications.
Are you saying a parent has no right to "spy" on anything their kids are doing? That's very naive . . .
Now you've excluded anyone who doesn't do so as a "good parent." No True Good Parent would tell you otherwise.
Unfortunately there are also bad parents in this world to go along with the good ones . . .
What metric are you using to determine what a true good parent is? One that sees things the way you do? Which is obviously to allow the kid to do what they want and hope they make the right choice on their own?
Because many people seem to be, in my opinion, going overboard. They're paranoid of everything and desperate to block anything they don't want their precious children seeing based on what appears to be nothing. For the children, of course.
If going overboard = me poking my nose into my daughters' lives then I'll gladly go overboard. If being paranoid = me attempting to keep them innocent and sheltered from what I deem to be inappropriate material for their age then I'll gladly be paranoid. Kids grow up fast enough today. No need to make it happen any faster.
Since I find it highly unlikely that they'll actually be affected in a negative way by the content, any age. Unless the parent has determined themselves that this specific child is negatively affected by the content. It seems to be assumed most of the time.
What if I find it very likely that my child is affected in a negative way by this content? Based on what you've been posting most parents aren't smart enough to make that determination . . .
You claimed an 8-year-old can self-regulate their XBox usage.
And they very well might be able to. But it's possible to be responsible in general without being responsible 100% of the time.
And that's the point . . . I would hope a parent would be able to better determine if their 8 year-old was behaving responsibly and know better than the 8 year-old would.