The difference is that 3 guys cannot commandeer a train and drive it into the Pentagon or Superbowl
Of course. TSA keeping "us" safe is really about the TSA keeping the government safe, both literally (Pentagon) and figuratively (Superbowl / World Trade Center): safe from embarrassing events which involve loss of life of the mere commoners, not necessarily the lives themselves.
"what role should Amazon and other public-cloud service providers play in preventing customers from using their services to commit crimes?"
The same role that Ford Motor Company is responsible to fill in preventing the use of it's vehicles as Getaway cars from scenes of crimes.
Eh, more like the same role that a chauffeur is responsible to fill in preventing the use of it's driven vehicles as getaway cars from scenes of crimes.
After all, once Ford makes a car they're done, right? EC2 is continually crunching numbers until it's cracked.
Perhaps it was a reference to the rechargeable battery accessory? It plugged into the ext. power port. Heavy, ugly, took forever to charge and it only lasted about 8 hours.
When I got it as a kid, after I used up the included AAs in the Game Boy, I picked it up and was massively disappointed, despite the "Nintendo Seal of Quality.";)
The problem is that a desire for irreversible consequences is in direct conflict with game replayability. If you can play the game again from a saved state, or even fresh from the start, you can do things differently. In fact, for most games, it's the only reason to restart. There aren't a whole lot of games I know of that are worth replaying because it's exactly the same.
Even action games aren't replayed exactly the same so long as the player's skill improve.
Is it possible that the recidivism rate is lower *because* we treat them differently? Isn't that the entire point of programs like these - to lower the recidivism rate?
I'd like to see the recidivism rate over time, since the moral panic of pedophiles and the subsequent complete destruction of any possibility for a normal life after conviction seems to be a recent thing.
You can't patch revealing your private key without revoking all public keys. Sony cannot fix this without breaking compatibility with every current game in its library.
Of course, breaking changes never stopped 'em before...
It is not about it being 7 inches, it is about it ALL OF THEM being 7 inches.
There are only so many display sizes that can deliver the required display resolution, pixel-change responsiveness, and touch sensitivity at sufficient quantity at a decent price. There are also pretty big implications when you single-source parts, especially live-or-die parts like the display. People are willing to go on waiting lists for the latest Apple product, not necessarily Dell.
When you consider the deal-breakers you mentioned, shoppers are going to be looking at those details and no one is going to ignore those pain points and buy based solely on screen size.
If that was truly the case, the rider would have eliminated the FCC and not just tie its hands for one particular issue.
Seriously, though, it should be about pro-corporate and anti-corporate. It should be about pro-people and anti-people. As a group. Net neutrality gives more freedom to the few (the connectivity companies) and takes away from the rest (content providers, consumers).
What a dirty trick. Obama can't even veto it without voting against "military and veterans". I can see the black-and-white political ads with terrifying music in the background now.
Without looking at the PDF, if I thought to check out the Author metadata, I would have expected to see Eric "eBaum" Bauman instead, considering it IS Anonymous, after all.
1) Order 2) Pay 3) Receive 'food' 4) Consume 'food' 5) Regret eating 'food' 6) Spend more time on the throne than I would have liked to.
It's step #2 that's the issue. People can be coerced into providing all sorts of information if you promise to send them coupons. I personally think that saving 20 cents on a fast food burger is worth giving out your email, name, address, and phone number, but, hey, I'm currently employed.
Comparing the private sexual desires of an individual to wholesale deception and fraud of unelected government goons in the name of the people with the intent of changing lives of those who aren't even aware of the backroom dealings isn't close to the same thing.
So that's what kids' science education is boiling down to? Standing still and holding a mirror?
Would have been much more awesome, and effective in encouraging science interest, in my opinion, if the kids had a hand in making something go boom.
Unless they have a major reversal of the busting of the myth, a kid would interpret this as "This is stupid. Science doesn't work. Let's go play Xbox."
Just like people volunteer for Folding@Home. If one believes in a cause strongly enough they could be convinced to lend CPU cycles (well, network packets) to help DDoS a site.
So the PI uses the honey trap on you, you flirt with this new woman and now the PI gives that information to your boss. If you piss off your boss you can lose both your career and your marriage? Tell me how this can be avoided.
You could try being faithful to your wife . . ..
As much as I hate the canard about "if you've done nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide", there is a valid corollary: "If you've done nothing wrong, you won't get caught".
Until the PI agency is under it's quota for the month and decides to finger you for playing hooky when they realize they need to show your bean-counter COO that they're actually catching people. At least for a crime you get a trial. Getting fired over something like this is just as life ruining as being a felon these days.
IMHO, that they are not reelected makes them more likely to be corrupt: they no longer have to answer to the people.
That whole Supreme Court Justice for life was written in a time when people didn't live as long as they do today. The constitution really should be amended for compulsory retirement.
But... with the justices are essentially above the government, the elected powers aren't going to give up the opportunity to drop a plant for their corporate masters that will have reach for many, many terms after they themselves have been voted out of office for the same corruption.
With all the TSA stuff in the press, I'd been thinking. Anyone sufficiently security minded should know that there's no such thing as perfect security. Maybe if all they ever did was transport dead people then you would know they wouldn't cause trouble. Even if you're not a pro, anyone could derive the law of diminishing returns from security theater.
But pre-9/11, shit happens on planes. Hijackings, bombs, whatever. They were pretty rare but they happened. But WHEN they happened, nobody pointed a finger at the president and said that he dropped the ball. Nobody cried about someone "not connecting the dots" and "intelligence failures" and all that stuff. It was just something tragic, pointless, but essentially a fluke of living in the modern world with the crazies.
But 9/11? People were chomping at the bits to blame Bush for SOMETHING, ANYTHING. And why not? A tight race that ended essentially via court order and Al Gore's withdrawing (read, not perusing additional legal action). Bush seemed to be setting the stage to frame his presidency as the The Vacationing President. Yeah, 9/11 was an act of terror with the goal of global effects, but even if it was just another random bomb the freshly brewed vitriol unlike anything I've seen before in my lifetime (Reagan and those after) would have had similar effects.
The upshot is that now random violent acts of terror now need to be defensible by politicians. It didn't happen because "shit happens," it happens because "Government Official Soandso screwed up." Protecting lives is secondary to protecting against SCANDAL. It's so politically important to make sure no random accidents or malicious acts of violence occur on their watch that politicians just can't afford to have anything happen on their watch.
As much as I hate to think this way, we really do need to have a random act of terror happen involving a plane and loss of life to show that these crazy TSA regulations are really just theater. That a dedicated individual, or group of individuals, can do what they feel they need to do and cannot be stopped just because we're afraid, and that, in the end, if it's your time, it's your time.
FWIW, a user needs administrator access to run code that alters the MBR. As Raymond Chen puts it, it rather involved being on the other side of this airtight hatchway.
Code signing is just a money making scheme for Microsoft cleverly disguised as a protective measure for us users. Smaller projects can not afford to have their code digitally signed by Microsoft. People have been writing workarounds for this involving spoofing the driver as being in TEST mode, but this is a hassle for the end user.
Um, code signing can be by any trusted authority. You need not pay Microsoft for user code.
Drivers are another story. They need to pass WHQL, but that's no big deal because it's already paid through the licensing fees collected if you want to put a Windows logo on your product certifying it's compatible with Windows. Naturally, if it's going to have the logo on the box, Microsoft wants to make sure your crappy driver doesn't cause problems that will be blamed on Windows.
Installing unsigned drivers in testing mode is a pain in a live environment for the same very good reason you don't want to perform crash testing on a live motorway.
Slashdot Mirror
Sure, everyone laughed the first time around. Not so funny now, eh?
The difference is that 3 guys cannot commandeer a train and drive it into the Pentagon or Superbowl
Of course. TSA keeping "us" safe is really about the TSA keeping the government safe, both literally (Pentagon) and figuratively (Superbowl / World Trade Center): safe from embarrassing events which involve loss of life of the mere commoners, not necessarily the lives themselves.
"what role should Amazon and other public-cloud service providers play in preventing customers from using their services to commit crimes?"
The same role that Ford Motor Company is responsible to fill in preventing the use of it's vehicles as Getaway cars from scenes of crimes.
Eh, more like the same role that a chauffeur is responsible to fill in preventing the use of it's driven vehicles as getaway cars from scenes of crimes.
After all, once Ford makes a car they're done, right? EC2 is continually crunching numbers until it's cracked.
I've heard that if you start cursing like a sailor, the voice recognition system will determine you're getting frustrated and send you to a human.
It seems to work when my credit card bank, but not my health insurance, so, YMMV.
Perhaps it was a reference to the rechargeable battery accessory? It plugged into the ext. power port. Heavy, ugly, took forever to charge and it only lasted about 8 hours.
When I got it as a kid, after I used up the included AAs in the Game Boy, I picked it up and was massively disappointed, despite the "Nintendo Seal of Quality." ;)
The problem is that a desire for irreversible consequences is in direct conflict with game replayability. If you can play the game again from a saved state, or even fresh from the start, you can do things differently. In fact, for most games, it's the only reason to restart. There aren't a whole lot of games I know of that are worth replaying because it's exactly the same.
Even action games aren't replayed exactly the same so long as the player's skill improve.
Is it possible that the recidivism rate is lower *because* we treat them differently? Isn't that the entire point of programs like these - to lower the recidivism rate?
I'd like to see the recidivism rate over time, since the moral panic of pedophiles and the subsequent complete destruction of any possibility for a normal life after conviction seems to be a recent thing.
In fact, I'm sort of surprised he hasn't been killed already, one would think the CIA could handle an assassination....
The last thing they need is to cement his martyrdom.
You can't patch revealing your private key without revoking all public keys. Sony cannot fix this without breaking compatibility with every current game in its library.
Of course, breaking changes never stopped 'em before...
The Wii is the only home console in this generation that wasn't initially sold at a loss, so, yes.
It is not about it being 7 inches, it is about it ALL OF THEM being 7 inches.
There are only so many display sizes that can deliver the required display resolution, pixel-change responsiveness, and touch sensitivity at sufficient quantity at a decent price. There are also pretty big implications when you single-source parts, especially live-or-die parts like the display. People are willing to go on waiting lists for the latest Apple product, not necessarily Dell.
When you consider the deal-breakers you mentioned, shoppers are going to be looking at those details and no one is going to ignore those pain points and buy based solely on screen size.
Are miners not people?
The courts have often rules that minors aren't people.
*rimshot*
Indeed. If you're going to pirate something... why would you pay for it?
A) Unless you know where to get it, you can't.
B) Why pay to get 1 real thing when you can pay the same (or less) to get hundreds of pirated titles?
If that was truly the case, the rider would have eliminated the FCC and not just tie its hands for one particular issue.
Seriously, though, it should be about pro-corporate and anti-corporate. It should be about pro-people and anti-people. As a group. Net neutrality gives more freedom to the few (the connectivity companies) and takes away from the rest (content providers, consumers).
What a dirty trick. Obama can't even veto it without voting against "military and veterans". I can see the black-and-white political ads with terrifying music in the background now.
Without looking at the PDF, if I thought to check out the Author metadata, I would have expected to see Eric "eBaum" Bauman instead, considering it IS Anonymous, after all.
1) Order
2) Pay
3) Receive 'food'
4) Consume 'food'
5) Regret eating 'food'
6) Spend more time on the throne than I would have liked to.
It's step #2 that's the issue. People can be coerced into providing all sorts of information if you promise to send them coupons. I personally think that saving 20 cents on a fast food burger is worth giving out your email, name, address, and phone number, but, hey, I'm currently employed.
Comparing the private sexual desires of an individual to wholesale deception and fraud of unelected government goons in the name of the people with the intent of changing lives of those who aren't even aware of the backroom dealings isn't close to the same thing.
Not even a little.
So that's what kids' science education is boiling down to? Standing still and holding a mirror?
Would have been much more awesome, and effective in encouraging science interest, in my opinion, if the kids had a hand in making something go boom.
Unless they have a major reversal of the busting of the myth, a kid would interpret this as "This is stupid. Science doesn't work. Let's go play Xbox."
Just like people volunteer for Folding@Home. If one believes in a cause strongly enough they could be convinced to lend CPU cycles (well, network packets) to help DDoS a site.
You could try being faithful to your wife . . . .
As much as I hate the canard about "if you've done nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide", there is a valid corollary: "If you've done nothing wrong, you won't get caught".
Until the PI agency is under it's quota for the month and decides to finger you for playing hooky when they realize they need to show your bean-counter COO that they're actually catching people. At least for a crime you get a trial. Getting fired over something like this is just as life ruining as being a felon these days.
IMHO, that they are not reelected makes them more likely to be corrupt: they no longer have to answer to the people.
That whole Supreme Court Justice for life was written in a time when people didn't live as long as they do today. The constitution really should be amended for compulsory retirement.
But... with the justices are essentially above the government, the elected powers aren't going to give up the opportunity to drop a plant for their corporate masters that will have reach for many, many terms after they themselves have been voted out of office for the same corruption.
With all the TSA stuff in the press, I'd been thinking. Anyone sufficiently security minded should know that there's no such thing as perfect security. Maybe if all they ever did was transport dead people then you would know they wouldn't cause trouble. Even if you're not a pro, anyone could derive the law of diminishing returns from security theater.
But pre-9/11, shit happens on planes. Hijackings, bombs, whatever. They were pretty rare but they happened. But WHEN they happened, nobody pointed a finger at the president and said that he dropped the ball. Nobody cried about someone "not connecting the dots" and "intelligence failures" and all that stuff. It was just something tragic, pointless, but essentially a fluke of living in the modern world with the crazies.
But 9/11? People were chomping at the bits to blame Bush for SOMETHING, ANYTHING. And why not? A tight race that ended essentially via court order and Al Gore's withdrawing (read, not perusing additional legal action). Bush seemed to be setting the stage to frame his presidency as the The Vacationing President. Yeah, 9/11 was an act of terror with the goal of global effects, but even if it was just another random bomb the freshly brewed vitriol unlike anything I've seen before in my lifetime (Reagan and those after) would have had similar effects.
The upshot is that now random violent acts of terror now need to be defensible by politicians. It didn't happen because "shit happens," it happens because "Government Official Soandso screwed up." Protecting lives is secondary to protecting against SCANDAL. It's so politically important to make sure no random accidents or malicious acts of violence occur on their watch that politicians just can't afford to have anything happen on their watch.
As much as I hate to think this way, we really do need to have a random act of terror happen involving a plane and loss of life to show that these crazy TSA regulations are really just theater. That a dedicated individual, or group of individuals, can do what they feel they need to do and cannot be stopped just because we're afraid, and that, in the end, if it's your time, it's your time.
FWIW, a user needs administrator access to run code that alters the MBR. As Raymond Chen puts it, it rather involved being on the other side of this airtight hatchway.
Code signing is just a money making scheme for Microsoft cleverly disguised as a protective measure for us users. Smaller projects can not afford to have their code digitally signed by Microsoft. People have been writing workarounds for this involving spoofing the driver as being in TEST mode, but this is a hassle for the end user.
Um, code signing can be by any trusted authority. You need not pay Microsoft for user code.
Drivers are another story. They need to pass WHQL, but that's no big deal because it's already paid through the licensing fees collected if you want to put a Windows logo on your product certifying it's compatible with Windows. Naturally, if it's going to have the logo on the box, Microsoft wants to make sure your crappy driver doesn't cause problems that will be blamed on Windows.
Installing unsigned drivers in testing mode is a pain in a live environment for the same very good reason you don't want to perform crash testing on a live motorway.
That's a closed source/open source distinction. It has nothing to do with development methodology... except that there are more eyes when it's open.
Depending on whose eyes for closed source, I'm pretty sure the NSA has plenty of great eyes looking over code.