maybe I'm just oversimplifying...
But, leave the wifi for entertainment purposes only and leave the CnC systems out of the loop?
369 posts • joined 29 Dec 2010
But, leave the wifi for entertainment purposes only and leave the CnC systems out of the loop?
personally I thought it was stupid, quite frankly, because I never thought Jon Stewart was all that humorous to begin with. I mean Trump is funny! Of course he's a ruthless business man who has built and lost more fortunes than most of us would ever see in several lifetimes, but I find it even more difficult to take him seriously because of his hair. FFS, in a soft breeze his head looks like it comes equipped with a convertible top. For those of you old enough, when the top is opened up, he looks like Bozo the clown. But I digress.
While trump might be a loud mouthed, self centered, narcissistic ass bag, he does appear to know business, whereas the current first pinhead never really held a public sector job. Damn it, I went off on a tangent again... Regardless of what your political alignment is, defacing the website of someone who's running for public office really doesn't accomplish much other than harden the opinions of that individuals supporters. Secondly, it's screwing around with a process that should be considered sacred to the citizens of the US, or at least the 30% who actually vote when they feel like it. Furthermore, to deface such a website with praise for someone who has less credibility and journalistic integrity of say... the entire cast of south park, family guy and beavis & butt head? It certainly doesn't say much for the people who did this.
Just my opinion.
Oh and for any other US citizens out there, honestly, I don't give a damn who you vote for, just vote. Otherwise we're going to get stuck with Trump, a shrill harpy who thinks she's above the law, one of a cast of countless idiots, rejects and morons from either side of the isle, or worst of all, Biden.
it's goddamn stupid, irresponsible and down right amateurish, especially by a division of one of the worlds largest automakers. Those assholes should be charged with criminal negligence. Once again, el reg, this article just screams "I need a douche bag icon!!!"
Mercedes-Benz patented the steering wheel back in the day. Imagine if all of the transportation manufacturers had to pay a royalty on each and every vehicle equipped with a steering wheel? It could be argued that the same basic principles apply.
you guys need to introduce a new icon, might I suggest a douche bag, just for companies like AFC Kredieten. What they're doing is unconscionable to say the very least. While they may be right on the thinnest of technicalities they do have the ethical obligation to protect potential customers personal data every bit as much as registered customers. Granted I'm probably preaching to a large choir, but the ass bag who told the spokes weaselette to basically say "fuck 'em, they're not our customers yet" should be fired and have charges filed against him or her. Therefore, I submit to the editors and management of el reg, an official request for a D-Bag icon.
But I actually miss Bill Gates at the helm. I've been using the 10 beta for a couple of weeks and it's interface is 100% better than that of the 8.x debacle... But I still fucking hate it. As one of the first posters intimated, I'm going to wait until Win 7 support ends.
I recall being at a security conference a few years back where they threw out a rather startling statistic: just under 75% of all the internet traffic was email, and of that the vast majority was spam. So, I really wonder how reliable their statistics are? Because anyway you put it, even .05% would be a staggering amount.
he's an unconscionable fuck.
I have a cousin who's a teacher and all I hear is how difficult it is to keep the kids attention or get them to follow through on assignments etc. At a time when America's schools suck so badly on math & science scores, it's great to see kids using abstract thinking to either find the solution, online or figuring it out for themselves.
Instead of contacting the authorities they should consider hiring a couple of the kids who shredded their ipads as security consultants. Punishing them would only foster an environment where kids would be too scared to learn.
Finally, suing apple because the kids blew through poorly configured software, managed by the DoE IT staff is like suing Porsche because someone intentionally drove over glass & nails and flattened their tires.
Kind of reminds me of when CSC rebranded to the "we cut corners" logo. HP's new logo just screams boring, bland and something utterly forgetable.
Wow, looks like I set off a bit of a firestorm and a flurry of thumbs down... So much for sharing an opinion.
OK, after I've had a chance to read some of the rebukes, let me respond with this: I can accept it as a way for people to upgrade small infrastructures, if they don't have an admin or the knowledge to accomplish this. I can can even accept the use of p2p to deliver updates to third world countries, or regions that have extremely limited bandwidth. I openly concede those two points.
I do have to pose a question to all of the folks who felt it necessary to rip me up one side and down the other... Remember little things like imesh and kazaa, and how rampant malware became with that software? Sure, on paper it sounds like fantastic idea, but apparently there are a number of us who've completely forgotten how many times a microsoft platform has gotten shredded or spoofed. That being said, it's next to impossible to poison Microsoft at the source, but tack on a little something to updates sitting in the p2p staging area and you have an even more efficient vector for delivery.
The *nix folks have always had their shit together, which is why a distributed upgrade methodology works.
Microsoft, not so much. Unless it's in a managed environment, most machines under patched, most have antivirus sigs that are expired, so any person who develops a convincing enough piece of scare-ware it's quite possible that could be used that could be used to get the bad guys foot in the door, to deliver more malicious garbage.
Just my opinion.
absolutely nothing could go wrong with this "honey of an idea"... Sigh.... are there any intelligent adults running Microsoft anymore?
jeezus, I've been in IT for 25 years and I don't think I've sent that many emails, period. Irrespective of politics (both parties are a bunch of fking criminals), as a state department employee, don't you think someone would at least question an email coming from email@example.com? Seriously? As much security (lol) that the state department has implemented, you can't tell me they didn't know she had her own mail server.
Just about every government agency (fed, state, county & local) has a very strict policy that expressly forbids the use of personal email for official business. She may have been the secretary of state, but she clearly broke the law.
Burn me once shame on you. Burn me twice and I will never do business with you again.
If the stupid douche bags were so damn concerned about their users and the whole user experience I doubt quite seriously if they would have that ignorant, malicious or arrogant to install such a shit bag application. FFS, they could have at least given the user the option.
I lasted maybe 10 minutes, none of which I'll ever get back. To be blunt, some of the hacking fallout has been far more entertaining and comical than this "movie" could have ever aspired to be.
< sarcasm> Oh.. Joy... Just what I've been craving... more adverts. < /sarcasm>
I always thought it was the responsibility of the CEO balance the needs of the company with those of the investors, by planning strategically, so the company avoids pitfalls which require a reduction in force. The fact that she felt the need to RIF all of those employees not only demonstrates that she is an utter failure as a leader and strategic visionary, but that the folks on the board don't have an ounce of god damn common sense by rewarding such a incompetent CEO and her vice booger eating morons.
Given IBM's divestiture in all things profitable, why any investment firm or stock speculator would voluntarily invest with IBM now is completely beyond me.
It's about fucking time somebody does something because obviously Adobe is having problems getting a handle on their code.
Let's face it, Bing is not a good word to use when a process becomes so ubiquitous that it's name can be interchanged as a verb. Had they been smart, they would have used something like wank or caress, as in wanking or caressing the answers out of the cloud. Had they made something with a catchy name, and something with a bit of a blue flavor to it (we all know that sex sells, especially to us geeky types), things might have been a little different and people might have overlooked it's inferiority to Google. But no, they chose Bing. Bing is not only a horrible product but the name conjures up images either an injury or some horrible syndrome.
That being said, as I've stated before, MS should simply focus on its core product offerings and not waste monies trying to compete against google.
Seriously, did he say "The most 'loved' Windows, yet"? OK I think somebody is seriously high. Given that MS single handedly killed over 15% of the PC market by sticking us with 8 & 8.1, there's not a chance in hell that I'm going to touch another MS OS at least until it's second or third SP.
Oh I was, and I make no apology for it either. To be honest, that's what brought this story to my attention. I'm off to smoke a cigarette now
Why is that cow still given press? Why is her family considered news worthy? I weep for humanity.
I've been working on getting my weapons safety officer certification and in my studies I've come to one indisputable conclusion about gun safety: There are no such things as accidents. You either take the proper precautions and respect the fact that any weapon is dangerous if not used properly, carefully or responsibly.
For example, a person accidently shoots themselves while cleaning their weapon - Not accidental. they didn't clear their weapon first.
Accidental discharge due to dropping a loaded weapon - Not accidental Why was a round in the chamber, why didn't they maintain control of the weapon? Why wasn't the safety engaged?
I could cite dozens of examples of irresponsible gun owners and criminals, but there's no need. However, I fail to see why a properly licensed or responsible and qualified adult can't own a weapon.
Just my 2 cents
everybody can argue the virtues of each caliber and their respective country's politics and standpoint on weapons ownership, but the fact of the matter is, the guy did an amazing job restoring a very important piece of history, as well as one beautiful rifle. I'd give my right arm to be able to add one to my collection, but sadly I need that appendage as it holds my trigger finger.
I don't know what the qualifications are to be designated a sniper rifle, but if I recollect, it's generally considered starting at 300 meters and continuing out to almost 2000 m. 0 to 300 meters would be categorized infantry rifle class.
Sure, we can argue details all day long, the fact is the guy did a great job
Everybody pisses and bemoans about how the rich or the have's are exploiting those less fortunate that they and a substantial amount of the posts in here are either neutral about or defending Comcast. By forcing us to opt out rather than opt in, they are exploting us and our property space for their gain.
"Bandwidth well, you are not charged for any bandwidth used by the open wifi as that is separate."
Sorry, I neither beleive nor find that practice to be ethical. As a subscriber I pay "X" per month with the expection I will be able to connect with a certain amount of bandwidth. The amount of bandwidth that a SoHo router/ap can process is fininte as is the frequency of any wireless signal they are broadcasting. IE, wireless is not compartmentalized like a true switched environment, and even if they are broadcasting a seperate ssid that's supposedly isolated from from the network I access, unless they have multiple frequency transceivers in those modems, which I doubt because because they are so notoriously cheap, so I am fighting for the bandwidth on the network that's broadcasting inside my home. Furthermore, who's to say this won't be abused by non-comcast subscribers who get account info from a friend?
Not only would I rip their equipment out of my home and replace it with something I've purchased, but they would get it back as I throw its pieces out the window of my car as I'm driving by their office.
And I'm sorry, cellular providers pay the property owners to lease the small plot of land their towers take up. The same rules of engagement should apply to the wireless network that's accessible from inside my house. I'm already paying an obscene amount for their services, at the very least they should off set it should I decide to OPT IN. I should not have to opt out to have my network unhijacked.
Finally, I will conceed that they own the public facing address of any broad band modem, but anything that originates from my modem, whether it be 10.x.x.x, 172.x.x.x or 192.168.x.x is mine. period.
I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you there. It's not exclusively the fault of the "AMA Cartel". It's more of a dog pile in that Dr's have to charge expensive fees to pay for their practices as well as the enormous malpractice they have to cough up yearly, to the insurance companies. The insurance companies have to charge the doctors enormous premiums for their Malpractice insurance, because whether or not the Dr. is guilty of doing anything wrong, juries will always go after the folks with the deepest pockets. Besides, most folks seem to think "what's a couple million to a hospital or medical system"? Then we have the douchebag ambulance chasing attorneys convincing people that the doctors acted with malicious intent and deserved to be sued, oh and they're more than happy to represent the patient for roughly 65% of any award. The insurance companies will try to settle out of court, in order to reduce costs to themselves and the dr's they represent. And the circle of life repeats itself.
In short, everybody wants something for nothing and if there's the slightest chance to drag things into a court, they're all over it.
It sucks that Sony put themselves in such a bad predicament and the people who committed this, ideally, would be punished. But I vaguely remember a root kit coming out of Sony a few years back that posed a pretty serious risk to, well, everybody and how much did they not get fined? Were they ever really punished for it?
A company I'm familiar with runs about 50 TB a day through their internet connection. We tend to know where that traffic is going and who's ending it. How in the name of hell did they allow this to happen and how the hell did they lose all that data?
Sorry, but that's almost Darwinian
Genius! Pure genius!
A kid with a dream... But I agree with a prior poster, the USA doesn't want the competition from individuals...
throw 4000% more bureaucracy at it and things will become so mired down that people will eventually die before their problems are addressed, then problem solved.
Every department entity I've ever worked with or felt their handy work, has just confirmed one thing: Government is useless to about 90% of everything it attempts to manage. Then, when it fails, they form blue ribbon commissions to get to the "root" cause, which is almost ALWAYS because a lack of proper oversight, when in fact it's just unethical people trying to illegally profit from their appointed posts.
The only thing that could possibly be worse is if it were managed directly by Congress (the opposite of "Progress").
Unless they have the raw data gathered by google or FB, collected from mouse clicks or search criteria, researchers are simply taking people's word. One thing I constantly see is that people tend to warp the truth. Be it through embellishments or outright lies, there always a question of the actual integrity of the data.
The other thing I find really disturbing about social media is how quick people are to react without knowing all of the facts. I was told there were three sides to a given event: one view, the contrary view and the truth. And given the bias of the individuals voicing their opinions or breaking the news, it can have an adverse impact on any legal cases or public perceptions of people, groups or products. Of course, the media is going to report those perceptions as gospel.
Positively brilliant analysis
"Think shouting down trolls in an internet forum, you can? Fail you will. Hmmm."
There is no try, only failure.
In my own little unscientific test, I had 3 tabs open in Chrome and 3 tabs open in IE. Chrome had spawned 11 separate services, which consumed well over 800 MB memory (physical or virtual). IE on the other hand, only generated 3 threads and consumed just a fuzz over 275 MB of memory. Why? I could understand the differences if I were running different applets in each tab, but in order to be objective, I opened the same pages in both browsers. I'm not a programmer so I genuinely don't understand why the huge difference in resources consumed. What's more, I performed the exact same test on Firefox, it only had one service running, which consumed just a smidge over 250 MB of RAM.
The other thing I didn't understand is the cpu would bounce on any of the chrome occurrences, even when the application was moved to the background. It's quite obvious to me chrome has become ungodly slow compared to the other two.
I know a lot of exceptionally brilliant people frequent these boards, so could one of you explain these subtle nuances?
While I appreciate the spirited debate of global warming/climate change, I think we're all overlooking one serious thing: Some moron down-voted Mr. Phud. I'll be the first to admit that humor and any sense of is quite subjective, but to down-vote something that was so clearly meant to be amusing to at least 17 people is just wrong!
Mr. Phud, I salute you in your valiant attempt, and I support you 1000%. However, ice floats. Antarctic ice should be hot footing it up to the Arctic (pun totally intended).
On that note, I will be drinking a pint and a shot in your honor and in the honor of the 16 other souls who upticked your post.
In order for the price to be driven down, don't manufactures need to sell enough to pass the eventual savings on to the consumer markets?
I honestly don't know whom to side with, I mean both entities are excessively unscrupulous and will use whatever tactics, legal or no, to exact what they feel is equitable for them. On one hand, we have a bottom feeding, repulsive, myopic, money grubbing organization that's perfectly content to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs and then we have the IRS.
Each one inspires such incredible nausea, for their own special ways, that I really don't know who I should be rooting for or against.
However, I do admire Microsoft's legal department for having the stones to make a stink with the only agency more fearsome than the NSA. MS's legal staff, whether they are affiliated with this case or not, are going to be audited quarterly for centuries after they are dead.
Which is worse, a flesh eating virus or sucking chest wounds in both lungs?
"To me (in the UK) the name mainly conjures up links to organised crime"
Yup, same crowd, however, it's usually the union management and their thugs that pretend to work amongst the rank & file workers. I have a of friends who are Teamsters and they are some of the most honest, hard working folks I know. But they're just truck drivers. They're only mixed up with the union because they don't have a choice (it's either join or else... Accidents do happen to independents who don't have the protection of the union).
In the bay area it's ungodly expensive. Where I live (great lakes region) the bay area is at least 5 or 6 times more expensive.
That being said, they don't have to stay there. There are countless jobs elsewhere that pay more and in areas that have a much lower cost of living.
..."My BOFH decided he wanted to ban internal FTP...."
I guess I'm lucky because both Security and myself decide on the policies that will be implemented on our network. As for the "It's my network" argument. I view it as a stewardship. It's ours to care for while we're there, but it never belongs to us. Quite honestly, if it were my network and I had a fraction of their money, I would have purchased the RIGHT equipment the first time, before something blows up and causing a system wide domino effect type of outage. But that's not the case so I will manage and care for the equipment I'm responsible for, the best I can.
I am responsible for the firewalls, the content filters and proxies for my employer. They have the expectations that the equipment will as close to every time, all the time, as possible. Since my performance review is on the line, plus pride in the level and quality of services I provide, I take it damn personally when a piece of equipment fails because of hardware or software problems.So much so that I look like a doting parent taking care of deranged child... That has a few extra arms, heads kidneys and maybe a multiple personality or two...
Would it be ground shattering enough to get nokia back into the lime light? I hope because I really liked their products, before the decline.
I truly do love my next gen firewalls and their ability to filter fb and their crap. I get almost 200 emails a day requesting access to fb, twitter, etc., and my usual reply is: Ask your supervisor, manager or VP. If they say yes (which nobody has yet) then I'll consider opening it. However, you must realize that just because you have access to these sites at home doesn't mean you're going to be able to get access to them in the office. Especially, when their sole purpose in life is to monitor your every move, on whatever computer you're on, and glean browsing history/intel from that. Occasionally someone gets pissy with me and I simply remind them that as much as I wish otherwise, the office isn't a democracy. Computer usage policies have been created to protect the company from losing sensitive data AND to keep people from generating a hostile work environment, by watching porn or something else that others might find objectionable.
I further find it quite humorous when people hoping to get by the policies I'm ordered to enforce, by bringing in their own devices, get completely honked off because their only option is to use Citrix. The tantrums people have thrown in my office have been quite epic. But, (and much to my amusement) my hands are tied.
As for FB for work, I'm really puzzled as to what kind of applications will be available to users. Last I checked, farmville & words for friends don't have any business equivalents, so I'm interested in seeing what kind of bullshit the zuck-head uses to justify this new product offering.
OK, is it me or am I the only one who finds this female character arousing?
Sir, that was probably the most brilliant analogy for a consultant I've ever heard. My I use it, please?
I was just thinking about the XP laptop massacre, back when Walmart sold a bunch of way under powered laptops (crap cpu and maybe 512 Mb RAM) and there were lawsuits all over the place. Yeah, the people got their product cheap, and they should have got what they payed for, but the plaintiff's had a very sympathetic jury... You'd figure that Walmart would have learned.
"The quality of the hardware mostly depends on build quality."
Walmart is hardly the pinnacle of craftsmanship nor quality,,, well... anything.... About all I see this good for is either an expensive clock that can be duct taped to the wall or a lower-mid range digital picture frame, that might be able to shuffle 3 or 4 pictures, before getting bogged down.
I'd never sully my ammunition with the likes of a pos like this. Every time I think MS has hit rock bottom, some idiot finds a pick ax and keeps on digging.