Lets assume for the sake of argument, that he is right. And the only people who care about privacy are 14 year olds... Is he saying that they don't deserve their privacy? Won't he at least think of the children?
That is amazing, I've never noticed the desktop was in there. Couldn't ever figure out why, when i switched between a few windows it worked like expected. But the second I did something different, then went back to the two or three windows I was using, they'd be gone. And alt-tab was usless
What I would like to see in windows is having a distinct zone to click on it instead of having to find the magic spot
Can you explain the difference between "distinct zone" and "magic spot"
Bottom left corner seems like a fairly distinct zone to me (as long as you don't have a multi monitor to the left)
Taking notes is overrated. If your brain can't process the information, taking notes won't mean anything in the long run.
I'm not a big note taker, but taking notes isn't overrated. First of all it can help you process the information. JUST that alone is probably worth taking notes. But it also can help you review the material later. You are given a LOT of material in a short amount of time. Rereading the notes helps you remember the big points. And they are big points that you came up with, not someone else.
I've never been a big fan of "grading on the curve" But there are two people involved, a student and a teacher. If everyone fails, is it because all the students are poor, or because the teacher is poor? It isn't a simple matter of "pass this test or else" The teacher should actually be teaching. And if too many students are failing, that is a good indication the teacher ins't doing their job.
they don't watch TV, in fact more and more of them don't even own a TV.
Actually they do... Sure they don't own a television tube, so technically they don't watch "TV" but that still watch the same shows everyone else does. They watch via netflix or get a torrent or some other mechanism.
Just because they don't own a television doesn't mean they aren't watching "tv"
no warrant was required because there should be no expectation of privacy in text messages, as anyone can pick up someone else's phone and read what's stored there.
and B) the EFF claims
"The state argues that just because someone can intercept a communication, you should reasonably expect that communication to be intercepted.
Remember the 4th amendment says "and papers" it does not say "and private papers that no one else can see" There are lots of things that anyone can pickup and read... a letter in an envelope (which can be intercepted as well)
There is a difference between glancing over someone's shoulder and seeing the text on the screen and physically taking the device, navigating to the text message section and scrolling through the messages.
We have every right and expectation that those texts will be private. As long as they aren't on the screen as we wave the phone around in the air.
Why does everything like this have to go to the Supreme Court?
Oh all high and mighty Hacker, who broke into a website, made by some guy on a tight deadline, or is probably their first programming job.
Neither of which is an excuse for leaving an SQL open to be injected. I'm shocked that in this day and age 1/3 of the applications have this vulnerability.
It seems like the most logical way to do it I'm surprised most other airports don't do the same. It is definitely more expensive though, requiring a lot more X-ray machines, personnel and terminal space.
I'm not sure how you deduce this is the most logical way to do it, although it does make it simpler to "secure the rest of the airport" But really the most logical way is to NOT do it. Why waste the time and the money, what are you trying to prevent?
Almost anything will serve as a weapon, and if you are reasonably strong you don't even need a weapon.
It used to be when you were flying back to the US you would have to answer a bunch of moronic questions. Things like "did you pack your checked bag, does it have any electronics in it, list them etc." One of the questions was "do you have anything that can be used as a weapon." My response was "yes" as ANYTHING can be used as a weapon.
Airports in other countries still let you go to the gate if not traveling.
What countries let you go to the gate if you are not travelling? I know some airports do, because the security check is at the gate itself. which is a bit frustrating as you have to sit in a small contained area prior to boarding. But I wouldn't say this lets non passengers go to the gate. Just a tad closer
That won't happen, because ultimately airports are only profitable as they are run as giant shops. Antiquated rules on the requirements for how long people need to be there before the flight are maintained to ensure there is a large number of trapped people sitting about who want to buy food/drink and who get bored or are addicted anyway to buying things they don't really need in shops.
Yeah, the airport shops like having people there, but you know what? They don't need "antiquated rules" to force people to come early. You know what would make them even MORE money, get rid of the stupid security checkpoint. BOOM instant customer increase as non passengers would be allowed in the airport.
They already have enough people due to lay overs, and people wanting to come earlier. Throw in non passengers who are waiting for arrivals, or hanging out until departure...
Some of train stations in Europe have ENORMOUS malls associated with them, and are quite busy, and they don't have these "antiquated rules" Not everything is a conspiracy
That's odd, because for the last 10 years, when they're calling the flight and if you don't come to the desk, they say they'll pull your luggage.
And they do, even delaying the flight to pull the bags. BUT apparently it is ok for the bags to flight on another flight without you, if it is behind you.
Right because "they could at least give you a drink for this" can be mistaken for "I have a bomb" a lot! You can pretty much say anything you want, as long as you don't threaten the agents, or claim you have a bomb (or similar) even in a joking matter. There are signs that say that even.
Yeah, you won't find someone who actually has a bomb in their suitcase, claim they have a bomb in their suitcase.... BUT then again, if they decide that is true and they stop checking... then the terrorist would then say they have a bomb, when they actually do.
It is quite a statement about the level to which commercial aviation has dropped when people start recommending a full day worth of Amtrak over a few hours of flying.
But it isn't a few hours of flying. Its what 3 hours of flying from BOS to CHI plus 2 hours to get treated like a criminal by TSA plus deplaning and waiting for luggage on the other end you are looking at 6-7 hours. And that is if you get a non stop flight, add another 3 or 4 hours if you have a layover. Sure taking the train is slower, but not quite as slow as it might seem.
Slashdot Mirror
Lets assume for the sake of argument, that he is right. And the only people who care about privacy are 14 year olds... Is he saying that they don't deserve their privacy? Won't he at least think of the children?
That's still Excels fault for: a) making this not obvious to spot, and
Excel typically does a decent job of indicating stuff like this... But it can't do anything when the user ignores it. This is in no way Excel's fault.
That is amazing, I've never noticed the desktop was in there. Couldn't ever figure out why, when i switched between a few windows it worked like expected. But the second I did something different, then went back to the two or three windows I was using, they'd be gone. And alt-tab was usless
What I would like to see in windows is having a distinct zone to click on it instead of having to find the magic spot
Can you explain the difference between "distinct zone" and "magic spot"
Bottom left corner seems like a fairly distinct zone to me (as long as you don't have a multi monitor to the left)
they act as if they are providing you with a service.
They ARE providing you with a service. Or did you think those Cell towers grow in the wild like mushrooms?
It's about deceitful advertisements that trick people in buying stuff.
And what would those deceitful advertisements be?
Expecting parents to be looking over the shoulder of their kids,
No, it isn't. That is your job as a parent. If you don't want your kids to spend money, don't give them the password.
It also nicely shows how the Democrats and Republicans aren't as different overall as they would have you believe.
There are people who believe there is a difference between the two parties?
The democrats are a ... party that doesn't want to interfere with your personal life
Where did you get this idea?
Taking notes is overrated. If your brain can't process the information, taking notes won't mean anything in the long run.
I'm not a big note taker, but taking notes isn't overrated. First of all it can help you process the information. JUST that alone is probably worth taking notes. But it also can help you review the material later. You are given a LOT of material in a short amount of time. Rereading the notes helps you remember the big points. And they are big points that you came up with, not someone else.
I've never been a big fan of "grading on the curve" But there are two people involved, a student and a teacher. If everyone fails, is it because all the students are poor, or because the teacher is poor? It isn't a simple matter of "pass this test or else" The teacher should actually be teaching. And if too many students are failing, that is a good indication the teacher ins't doing their job.
The data should be used to flag up pupils who may be struggling,
How is this data going to show the pupils who are struggling? Isn't that what your tests and coursework is for?
they don't watch TV, in fact more and more of them don't even own a TV.
Actually they do... Sure they don't own a television tube, so technically they don't watch "TV" but that still watch the same shows everyone else does. They watch via netflix or get a torrent or some other mechanism.
Just because they don't own a television doesn't mean they aren't watching "tv"
no warrant was required because there should be no expectation of privacy in text messages, as anyone can pick up someone else's phone and read what's stored there.
and B) the EFF claims
"The state argues that just because someone can intercept a communication, you should reasonably expect that communication to be intercepted.
Remember the 4th amendment says "and papers" it does not say "and private papers that no one else can see" There are lots of things that anyone can pickup and read... a letter in an envelope (which can be intercepted as well)
There is a difference between glancing over someone's shoulder and seeing the text on the screen and physically taking the device, navigating to the text message section and scrolling through the messages.
We have every right and expectation that those texts will be private. As long as they aren't on the screen as we wave the phone around in the air.
Why does everything like this have to go to the Supreme Court?
The problem is, the next game or program won't run on XP... And thus "won't work"
Oh all high and mighty Hacker, who broke into a website, made by some guy on a tight deadline, or is probably their first programming job.
Neither of which is an excuse for leaving an SQL open to be injected. I'm shocked that in this day and age 1/3 of the applications have this vulnerability.
It seems like the most logical way to do it I'm surprised most other airports don't do the same. It is definitely more expensive though, requiring a lot more X-ray machines, personnel and terminal space.
I'm not sure how you deduce this is the most logical way to do it, although it does make it simpler to "secure the rest of the airport" But really the most logical way is to NOT do it. Why waste the time and the money, what are you trying to prevent?
Almost anything will serve as a weapon, and if you are reasonably strong you don't even need a weapon.
It used to be when you were flying back to the US you would have to answer a bunch of moronic questions. Things like "did you pack your checked bag, does it have any electronics in it, list them etc." One of the questions was "do you have anything that can be used as a weapon." My response was "yes" as ANYTHING can be used as a weapon.
Airports in other countries still let you go to the gate if not traveling.
What countries let you go to the gate if you are not travelling? I know some airports do, because the security check is at the gate itself. which is a bit frustrating as you have to sit in a small contained area prior to boarding. But I wouldn't say this lets non passengers go to the gate. Just a tad closer
That won't happen, because ultimately airports are only profitable as they are run as giant shops. Antiquated rules on the requirements for how long people need to be there before the flight are maintained to ensure there is a large number of trapped people sitting about who want to buy food/drink and who get bored or are addicted anyway to buying things they don't really need in shops.
Yeah, the airport shops like having people there, but you know what? They don't need "antiquated rules" to force people to come early. You know what would make them even MORE money, get rid of the stupid security checkpoint. BOOM instant customer increase as non passengers would be allowed in the airport.
They already have enough people due to lay overs, and people wanting to come earlier. Throw in non passengers who are waiting for arrivals, or hanging out until departure...
Some of train stations in Europe have ENORMOUS malls associated with them, and are quite busy, and they don't have these "antiquated rules" Not everything is a conspiracy
That's odd, because for the last 10 years, when they're calling the flight and if you don't come to the desk, they say they'll pull your luggage.
And they do, even delaying the flight to pull the bags. BUT apparently it is ok for the bags to flight on another flight without you, if it is behind you.
Right because "they could at least give you a drink for this" can be mistaken for "I have a bomb" a lot! You can pretty much say anything you want, as long as you don't threaten the agents, or claim you have a bomb (or similar) even in a joking matter. There are signs that say that even.
Yeah, you won't find someone who actually has a bomb in their suitcase, claim they have a bomb in their suitcase.... BUT then again, if they decide that is true and they stop checking... then the terrorist would then say they have a bomb, when they actually do.
It is quite a statement about the level to which commercial aviation has dropped when people start recommending a full day worth of Amtrak over a few hours of flying.
But it isn't a few hours of flying. Its what 3 hours of flying from BOS to CHI plus 2 hours to get treated like a criminal by TSA plus deplaning and waiting for luggage on the other end you are looking at 6-7 hours. And that is if you get a non stop flight, add another 3 or 4 hours if you have a layover. Sure taking the train is slower, but not quite as slow as it might seem.
Why do Americans keep accepting this excuse?
The entire East Coast has a population density easily capable of sustaining high-speed rail
Maybe because not all American's live on the East Coast.