This is the event that made me realize digital privacy is important to anyone, not just those who know they are doing something they need to hide. There was a case a few years ago where some guy left his toddler in the carseat instead of dropping him off at daycare and the kid died. The police went through his online history and found he was talking to prostitutes and engaging in other extramarital, sexually deviant behavior. On that alone, they gave him life in prison because a jury believed he intentionally left the child to die based on that alone. I have no idea if that's what truly happened or not, maybe there was other evidence that really connected those dots. But based on what was in the news, I found that to be way outside of what a reasonable person would consider proving beyond reasonable doubt. It sounded more like a moralistic judgement based on his online activity that had nothing to do with the death.
This is the problem as I see it; who gets to defines what 'normal' online behavior is? If you get accused of a crime you didn't do and it's discovered that you watched graphic accidents on LiveLeak, or perused escort ads, or looked at extreme pornography etc, there's no frame of reference for how "normal" or common that behavior is. Until that is better understood by the general public, any prosecutor can convince a group of 12 mediocre idiots off the street to convict you on any charge they want based on character assassination alone.
As someone who still connects air traffic control sized, over the ear studio headphones to their device with a 3 foot coily 1970s cable, i say....mwah ha ha ha.
Have an operations team that's in charge of ordering the supplies in the first place have the key to the supply room. When an employee needs something, the operations member lets them in and sees what they take. Simple. If someone was watching me I'd be less likely to take 20 packs of post it notes at once.
*that should have read, "a major percentage of developers and QA staff in the last 20 years have shifted from local developers to people shipped over from India". I personally would be very discouraged entering this field.
I work for a major financial institution and a major percentage of emplolyees in the last 20 years have shifted from local developers to people shipped over from India.
It's also very possible that people who eat organic food are just more cognizant about nutrition, health, and they food they eat. I'd like to see a study of two groups who both eat healthy and excercise, but one group eats organic food. Not slamming organic food, but I am skeptical.
I'd add, I understand if people are having a hard time finding a better job, but that's an entirely different (and valid) issue. Because you are in-between web developer jobs doesn't mean Uber is obligated to pay you more...they aren't a welfare program.
It's a low skill, low barrier-to-entry job. If you can drive a car and use a GPS app, you can be an Uber/Lyft driver. These jobs (whatever they are, be it fast food employee, Wal-Mart greeter, etc.) don't pay a lot. If that's the only type of job you can do, that sucks. If you can do something that maybe is a little more challenging or specialized, you'll make more money. I'm getting a little worn out seeing these 'my bullshit easy job doesn't pay enough' news stories personally.
I think 'drooling idiots that use Windows' is a tad harsh. I have to use Windows at work like most people. I tried to run Linux at home on the family computer several times but it just got old when all your Steam games wouldn't work, or the kids want to play Roblox and there was no Linux support, or you hardware choices were limited.
Exactly....if you dont believe this goes on, try searching for something controversial that goes against leftist propaganda and compare the results with another engine like DuckDuckGo. It's sadly very predictable.
It doesn't matter. If you want to be at the top, start your own business and set your own salary. I'd bet a lot of the readers of this site make decent, possibly above average wages.
This is actually much more complex that it seems at first glance. Why are arrests public because nothing is more dangerous than secret arrests, disappearing people, so they have to be public, very public, to protect the individual being arrested.
I think paying a small fee for a record check at a local courthouse or being able to call a precinct and ask was 'so and so' arrested is public enough. We don't need Slammer magazines at the gas station shaming people for tabloid entertainment or the local news site pushing them all online so thousands of locals can browse looking for coworkers. The arrest itself, being made excessively public, is enough to ruin someone regardless if it is BS or not. I've gotten arrested for absoultely stupid shit before and the cop just threw whatever he could at me to see what would stick (which subsequently got thrown out at court). Thankfully that was before this crap went online.
Ever since Snowden I pretty much assume every mouse click, keyboard press, sound, image and video on anything with a power button is potentially being watched.
"If the CEO knew about vulnerability that needed patching," That's a ludicrous comment, the CEO of Equifax, or the CEO of any company, is not going to be aware of anything IT is doing for maintenance unless it's brought to his attention. He may not have even known what Apache even was. These aren't necessarily technical people in a CEO role. Now the CIO...that's a different story. I am sure the systems in use at that company probably have some critical patch in some system that needs to be applied every few weeks. The CEO is very high level and focused on the core strategy of the business, not IT. Now, when someone comes to a CEO and lets him know there was a serious data breach and the decision is to not inform people for 3 months while you dump your stock, that's a different story.
Slashdot Mirror
This is the event that made me realize digital privacy is important to anyone, not just those who know they are doing something they need to hide. There was a case a few years ago where some guy left his toddler in the carseat instead of dropping him off at daycare and the kid died. The police went through his online history and found he was talking to prostitutes and engaging in other extramarital, sexually deviant behavior. On that alone, they gave him life in prison because a jury believed he intentionally left the child to die based on that alone. I have no idea if that's what truly happened or not, maybe there was other evidence that really connected those dots. But based on what was in the news, I found that to be way outside of what a reasonable person would consider proving beyond reasonable doubt. It sounded more like a moralistic judgement based on his online activity that had nothing to do with the death. This is the problem as I see it; who gets to defines what 'normal' online behavior is? If you get accused of a crime you didn't do and it's discovered that you watched graphic accidents on LiveLeak, or perused escort ads, or looked at extreme pornography etc, there's no frame of reference for how "normal" or common that behavior is. Until that is better understood by the general public, any prosecutor can convince a group of 12 mediocre idiots off the street to convict you on any charge they want based on character assassination alone.
As someone who still connects air traffic control sized, over the ear studio headphones to their device with a 3 foot coily 1970s cable, i say....mwah ha ha ha.
Have an operations team that's in charge of ordering the supplies in the first place have the key to the supply room. When an employee needs something, the operations member lets them in and sees what they take. Simple. If someone was watching me I'd be less likely to take 20 packs of post it notes at once.
Enough said.
*that should have read, "a major percentage of developers and QA staff in the last 20 years have shifted from local developers to people shipped over from India". I personally would be very discouraged entering this field.
I work for a major financial institution and a major percentage of emplolyees in the last 20 years have shifted from local developers to people shipped over from India.
It's also very possible that people who eat organic food are just more cognizant about nutrition, health, and they food they eat. I'd like to see a study of two groups who both eat healthy and excercise, but one group eats organic food. Not slamming organic food, but I am skeptical.
Back in my days we had PRINTED manuals!!
I'd add, I understand if people are having a hard time finding a better job, but that's an entirely different (and valid) issue. Because you are in-between web developer jobs doesn't mean Uber is obligated to pay you more...they aren't a welfare program.
It's a low skill, low barrier-to-entry job. If you can drive a car and use a GPS app, you can be an Uber/Lyft driver. These jobs (whatever they are, be it fast food employee, Wal-Mart greeter, etc.) don't pay a lot. If that's the only type of job you can do, that sucks. If you can do something that maybe is a little more challenging or specialized, you'll make more money. I'm getting a little worn out seeing these 'my bullshit easy job doesn't pay enough' news stories personally.
I would add I am still holding onto Windows 7 as long as possible...
I think 'drooling idiots that use Windows' is a tad harsh. I have to use Windows at work like most people. I tried to run Linux at home on the family computer several times but it just got old when all your Steam games wouldn't work, or the kids want to play Roblox and there was no Linux support, or you hardware choices were limited.
I meant search results from Google vs. another engine.
Exactly....if you dont believe this goes on, try searching for something controversial that goes against leftist propaganda and compare the results with another engine like DuckDuckGo. It's sadly very predictable.
It doesn't matter. If you want to be at the top, start your own business and set your own salary. I'd bet a lot of the readers of this site make decent, possibly above average wages.
Sadly, this actually happens.
Maybe I misread/misunderstood this article but I read this as, 'let's dumb down computer programming".
This is actually much more complex that it seems at first glance. Why are arrests public because nothing is more dangerous than secret arrests, disappearing people, so they have to be public, very public, to protect the individual being arrested.
I think paying a small fee for a record check at a local courthouse or being able to call a precinct and ask was 'so and so' arrested is public enough. We don't need Slammer magazines at the gas station shaming people for tabloid entertainment or the local news site pushing them all online so thousands of locals can browse looking for coworkers. The arrest itself, being made excessively public, is enough to ruin someone regardless if it is BS or not. I've gotten arrested for absoultely stupid shit before and the cop just threw whatever he could at me to see what would stick (which subsequently got thrown out at court). Thankfully that was before this crap went online.
First computer I ever tossed out because the screen died...
I don't know about everyone else, but I feel like purchasing some CD's!
What sort of idiot crosses the street without watching for traffic???
My father in law is in his 90s and all he does is sit around and watch Judge Judy. If you find a way to extend your 30s maybe sign me up.
Ever since Snowden I pretty much assume every mouse click, keyboard press, sound, image and video on anything with a power button is potentially being watched.
"If the CEO knew about vulnerability that needed patching," That's a ludicrous comment, the CEO of Equifax, or the CEO of any company, is not going to be aware of anything IT is doing for maintenance unless it's brought to his attention. He may not have even known what Apache even was. These aren't necessarily technical people in a CEO role. Now the CIO...that's a different story. I am sure the systems in use at that company probably have some critical patch in some system that needs to be applied every few weeks. The CEO is very high level and focused on the core strategy of the business, not IT. Now, when someone comes to a CEO and lets him know there was a serious data breach and the decision is to not inform people for 3 months while you dump your stock, that's a different story.
I thought these devices were just a way to sneak a microphone in your house.