"at least in the elonoggin. Well done Elon!"
You got a little doo doo on your nose.
elonoggin? Really??!
231 karma · joined May 21, 2014
You got a little doo doo on your nose.
elonoggin? Really??!
We couldn't lay off the nearly 250,000 active employees of the Security Theater arm of the US Government just because we had an actionable technological solution that reliably worked. We have votes to think about!
Considering Democrats probably are also the most social media savvy/participant of all the voting participants it just seems plausible.
This sort of presentation makes for nice kindling but unfortunately not much more. In the end, your voice is unfortunately 'public'.
There is no difference between this and muttering too loudly. If someone hears you asking the voices in your head to quiet down, you would not think to blame them for violating your privacy by listening.
Eventually we will all have to re-assess what we accept businesses, government, and private parties knowing and doing with what we say. It is also a reminder that what we do (our body motions) will be up next for recording and analysis as motion, cameras, and facial recognition become more prevalent (iphone X).
I so agree. I saw things like this in the military. At that time it was tools...
Before aircraft takeoff and between shift changes; all tools must be turned in and accounted for. If one is missing all personnel for that shift and the one coming on have to go together for a tool search at every jet, vehicle, etc. This means every person searches as a team until it is found - this could be 50 or more people, 1/2 staying late from the previous shift! Depending on the supervisor they may also ground the aircraft squadron temporarily- ensuring that the pilots and admin staff also know who lost a tool.
It was extreme hazing - but at least I could assume that it was done for a good reason - true safety. If a jet starts up and a tool gets sucked into the engine bay people can die - not to mention the damage - it would be career ending for those found at fault.
Unfortunately like anything some joker I saw used it as an opportunity to harass someone they did not like. People could pocket a targets tool for a while, and turn it in anonymously at some point into the search when they felt enough damage had been done.
When I saw someone do that and justify it as a lesson - I decided that my integrity is more valuable. I have not regretted that particular decision yet.
Forgery is a crime - and I think sending an email from someones unlocked computer would fall under that if it was pressed in court.
If sysadmins have things set up that way, they can unlock a locked desktop and log in as the user; or even change the users account password and log in. Using these two methods as the example I would think no sane person would think it ok to log in and send an email as described. So why is it OK in this case, when a computer is left unlocked?
A normal person should feel guilty digging in another persons stuff - always; and the person who was violated should also be indignant. Period.
What if a boss or coworker had requested you to take care of something on their computer? Is the fact they gave you the access make it ok to look through their browser history while your there? If not, what exactly is and is not off limits during an 'authorized' entry event? And what is different if they left it unlocked instead?
Hope you can see how this opens a huge pandoras box.
Also, if people are not there to protect the team and coworkers, how can they trust each other when it is really important?? What will happen when there is an attacker from the internet forging things? How will you even know who is telling the truth then?
A professional will take care of the problem with a warning or a note. After so many repeat offenses, give the warnings more teeth, and/or start tracking them and provide punishments. Alternatively lock the desktops with an inactivity timer.
Just realized maybe you are trolling (or hoping you are!).
https://www.reddit.com/r/norge/comments/67jox4/denne_kr%C3%A...
"...peppes pizza in Oslo S."
Certainly if law stated we should convict people based instead on 'virtually' conclusive evidence your conclusion is valid. I just hope they are real, real careful with that evidence! To prevent the worry of getting caught up when you are innocent, we (and other countries) choose instead to base decision on a criminal matter conversely by rejecting a criminal case on reasonable doubt.
With that understood; I ask you as a technical person (assuming you probably are as this is Hacker News); is it reasonable to say that an IP may not accurately tie to a particular individual in at least some non-extraordinary circumstances?
As a technical engineer I already know the answer it does not; and it can happen due to admin negligence at a minimum (admin wipes out the leases or changes the address pool then changes it back because it was a mistake). At least I certainly hope no one was convicted based on their IP in any network I have managed (or at least they had a good enough attorney to know to check in with me!).
It even has a name '"buy the rumor, sell the news"
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/n/news-trader.asp
The idea behind this, simply put, is that if you are in a trade for whatever reason with a stock that has a major announcement coming; you are pretty much at the potential peak at announcement time so it is a good time to get out.
1) Just, Wow. I am impressed at the amount of good advice here - HN'ers really do go all out to help.
2) Problem - too much advice is hard to sift through. To a carpenter, you will need a better hammer or to charge less; to a painter, the finish isn't smooth. Choose carefully; I doubt feelings will be hurt.
3) Finally - remember this is all an odds game. Your resume has to arrive, and subsequent interview has to complete all in concert with a need.
JD's (job descriptions) are supposed to improve these odds. But often JD's are only up for an HR requirement or other reasons. Some examples are:
- An H1B requirement
- Already have an applicant they want but they have to justify something
- Internal fill
- Tire kicking (happens in security roles - teams take their time filling these)
- Comparison people for the hiring process (they have a bead on one applicant, but they have to include 2 other applicants in on-site interviews for balance)
- Position is terminated before hire due to lack of funding/budget
- Situational changes (role is fluid and changing - you applied but the role itself was adjusted afterward)
These are just some of the reasons. Don't give up!
This is one of several ways to apply (I think the first way one should apply) and after some time you should be doing more.
I have applied to over 168 jobs (I used LinkedIn and it tracks them all). Of that I got about 25 recruiter interviews (level 0), about 15 Hiring Manager interviews (level 1) and about 10 second stage calls or on-site (level 2).
None have yet panned out or even look close...
It's hard out there right now - I do not know why precisely. I have many guesses.
But the important thing is to keep applying. Certainly, if you stop, nothing will happen further on its own. Knowing your not alone hopefully helps you do that.
In the future I hope we can do something smarter with this information.
Which confirms your interpretation and labeling of the 'midwit egomaniac'.
The sad part - it is not usually immediately clear which kind of jerk your dealing with, since they behave the same!
Secondarily, it is not immediately clear to an outsider upon observation which is which either...
Summary I drew: There are genuine mental health related conditions that can cause someone to be a jerk AND still be brilliant. When you find that, you have to first separate them off so as not to detract from others work. Secondly if they can't cut it then let them go.
binhex/arch-delugevpn
If you have trouble reach out again.
Like someone else mentioned, I also didn't see HDMI.
I think I heard the 'whammy' sound play...
To install windows 95 or NT4 was a godawful number of disks. If you did have those, you also had to have the proper NIC drivers on hand as well to get it connected, and there were many different NIC's in our lot - far too many to carry drivers with you. And no USB and zip disks were far too faulty to rely on.
To add the Novell IPX protocol stack - it was a 6 floppy disk endeavor. Disk drives were slow - very slow... It would take hours to complete, and often the disks would not properly read.
I think it was an anti-piracy measure - the Novell installer would fail at the final disk of 6, and it would not find a particular file - the Novell installer floppies were over-provisioned so they were larger than regular floppies. This would make it impossible to copy.
But - using one of these Xircom adapters, with 3 disks we could boot DOS, install Xircom drivers, add TCP/IP and SMB, mount and format the local hard drive, and finally copy the Windows installer files and all possible drivers at once to the local drive. Run setup.exe; in half an hour you had a complete workstation on the network.
1. Use WiFi routers for WiFi.
Avoid firewalling, NAT, authentication protocols, the strongest levels of encryption, or other packet changes/control on the WiFi Router.
Resources are always constrained. Mentioned processes consume resources and the load only appears under real world conditions that you did not anticipate or could not replicate in test.
2. Distribute (as much as possible). A little work/cost up front will save you down the line.
A lot of WiFi routers support multiple radios (IE 2 radios). That gives you three points of failure for every router - one for each radio, and one for the router. Take one dual band router down and everyone in the coverage area loses connectivity in both bands.
Separating these will provide improved redundancy, throughput, offloading, and etc.
Based on that - I think an open informational model would go a long way.
I imagine this would be a history or graphing of win vs. loss and dollar amounts or similar statistics for the customer/gambler.
It could be provided on say a slip of paper, presented each time the customer goes to the cage or buys chips at the tables.
The customer could even refuse the paper if they 'wanted to bury their head in the sand'.
On the one hand, no one wants to publicly state that they believe death should be promoted. After all, where does that as a society leave us? What's next, suicide booths?
On the other, there are individual rights, dignity and choice. Much like in Old Yeller; we do know there are times when it is better to let go.
Even easier than in Old Yeller (for those of us who don't have to face this painful decision, at least not today) is the fact that these are certified sane adults making their own decision, as they are approved beforehand by the trusted of society (doctors).
Choice is a basic human right we all can agree we definitely want to provide. I am also reminded we all eventually die anyway and nothing we can do will stop that.
Our only 'choice' then, when it comes to death; is merely to improve its timing.
http://www.familywatchdog.us/showmap.asp
Search Criteria: New York, United States
If I could link it directly I would.
I am all for keeping kids safe; but this seems to have unintended knockoff effects, such as forcing children who want to play Pokemon Go to venture multiple blocks from their homes in order to play.
I guess I would say it is one thing to 'sell' public domain pictures in your database along with privately held photos - using a subscription model, Getty could say it is just creating a one stop shop and charging for that service. I am sure their lawyers thought about that long ago, when they first brought on the Public Domain photos.
But to go to the level of actually shaking people down for money when they are using a photo that is Public Domain leans toward organized crime, with copyright laws behaving as accessories to enforcement. It's like charging 'protection money' when you should naturally have freedom from harassment.
How many uncounted people have paid that shakedown fee for their Public Domain pictures, not knowing any better...
Proves the old adage - Knowledge is Power.
It shows their #1 priority was collecting as many pieces of work as they could, and their #2 effort was reinforcing their payment system (a la threats if you don't pay).
No where in that equation was the artist, the art itself, or any related interests. They only cared about being the middleman and acted like it.
It's akin to Getty setting up a small tent inside of Central Park, and asking people that walk by to pay an entry fee.
But Getty goes 1 step further: They hire strongarm guys to go around the park and tell people (one-on-one) that they skipped out on their 5 dollar entry fee and they can 'settle' with them right now or be taken to court.
It's terrible.
I can't imagine how to solve that without a total change of copyright laws, other than scare the bejesus out of them. Which seems to be exactly what the photographer is doing.
Realistically, moving is a lot easier than trying to change a general racism bias.
IE - I am white. Yes, that means I am possibly not a reliable source of income (I don't live to work, I work to live), I am not thrifty (I don't mind renting, and I might take out a new car loan instead of buying cheaper used), my credit score is lower and I have no savings, and I will not hesitate to bring the law down on you (I know my rights!)
But my wife is Indian.
My actual point is racism is out there, and I think the most that can be done is racism shaming and try to work it to our advantage.
Studies show it is a natural part of being human - even babies show preferences based on visible attributes like skin color (I need to find that reference).