Microsoft may have been bootstrapped (I will go with what you are saying without verifying) however it also had the backing and full faith and credit of a somewhat wealthy and connected family.
8,297 karma · joined March 6, 2011
I have car insurance for my Porsche. According to the list it's vulnerable.
Chance of getting stolen? Quite small. If it does insurance pays in my case the full value not the depreciated value (age of car as only one reason). Not something I am worrying about.
How many cars are actually stolen as a result of this flaw?
Just another example of the security industrial complex fanning the flames...
Not really. A bit like saying "if I don't let my kid watch football they will have more time to study!".
If they didn't spend time fundraising they would spend time on some equally worthless (for the public) activity. Like marching in parades and kissing babies, or giving out stupid medals, or attending events so that they can get more votes in the next election or attending events that will get others elected that will then owe them a favor.
Obama after he was elected made a point of visiting his kids school (iirc the week after he was in office or close to that) in order to show that a father should be interested in his kid's education presumably or something like that. What is ironic is that with a father like the former President (not to mention a mother in attendance who went to Harvard as well and is quite educated) Obama's kids are the least likely to have to ever worry about their education and school studies.
I would imagine that half the things that Obama or any President does in White House events involves some favor or another for a politician that helped them in the past in some way. (In addition to donors of course) Otherwise hard to justify why such an important guy should take the time from his important work for so many photo ops.
Question for anyone running a business startup or otherwise. Do you spend your time doing silly stuff like that w/o a clear business purpose? Of course not.
On the other hand nothing wrong with having aspirations and if people didn't have aspirations many things in society would never be accomplished. Aspirations drive people.
I think there is a saying something like "the difference between men and boys is the size of their toys".
And in fact many of those "toys" don't matter once you get older simply because you are in a different place in life with different needs and outlook. Can't imprint that thought pattern when younger and quite frankly why would you? What fun would that be?
I remember when I was in my 20's I was able to afford a really nice car one that I had always wanted in my teens. About a week after getting the car I was very aware of the fact that I wasn't any happier than I had been prior to getting the car (and actually thought I would be) and maybe even a little less so (anticipation effect if you want to call it that). I was still glad that I got the car though and have always had nice cars since and never regretted it. But part of my motivation has changed. Back then it was to get a girl by having a nice car and to impress people (used to be like that, the "get a girl" part many older folks will tell you). Now I like it just because its a nice thing to have. And in some cases having nice things helps with business as well in the bricks and mortar world at least.. I can tie a few deals to the fact that I drove a nice car. Plus getting random comments from strangers does provide a boost.
As you get old you do become more mellow because you can be more mellow. Because in many cases you have either "arrived" or your needs have changed. The kids college is already taken care of and all of that, have a vacation place, nice house and so on.
But don't think for a second that it would be possible to "not care" "now" if the effort hadn't been put in earlier to insure at least some financial security. And I am not talking about living richly either. But having enough that you don't have to be concerned with money is a nice thing don't let anyone tell you differently.
"Harvard, like a number of other top law schools, no longer ranks its law students for any purpose including a guide to recruiters. "
[1] Except on the right panel as "company" but not in the actual results unless you click that link.
Note: I have been dealing with ICANN since the start and they tend to be pretty cool and fair with registrars but they do take complaints seriously and do follow up on them. Creates a ton and a pain of paperwork for registrars so that really is the negative to not complying in a way.
Per ICANN if domain is made innactive the page that it points to if it points to a page (it doesn't have to you can just put the name on hold) needs to describe how to get the domain back. Once again that's only if a page is displayed displaying a page is not required.
https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/errp-2013-02-28-en
"2.2.4. In interrupting the DNS resolution path of the registration, if the registrar directs web traffic to the domain name to a web page while the registration is still renewable by the RAE, that web page must conspicuously indicate that the domain name registration is expired and provide renewal instructions."
Also had those plastic syntax cheat sheets which I picked up.
I think what you mean to say perhaps was "raise enough money to change the laws by hiring lawyers and political operatives that know how to work the system".
And what do you mean by "predatory real estate owners and bankers". It's a free market system if you can't afford to live in an area then live somewhere where you can afford given what your job is. Nobody is entitled to a particular job in an area (if they are not paid enough) if they can't (with the pay) afford the rent. I'd love to live many places but I have to consider the practicality. Hawaii would be nice! [1] As far as people getting pushed out because of rents being driven up, the answer to that is not to take property away from lawful owners.
Want to "lower the rent"? Government buys at fair market value some apartments or housing how about that? (Sure that will happen, right?) Fine as long as the rightful owners agree and everyone else in the community uses their tax dollars to pay for acquiring that property.
Given you are so unhappy about this would you use your tax dollars so that others could live and not have high rent?
[1] To clarify not because of housing prices but because of economic opportunity. NYC would be nice also however housing, traffic and so on are out of my comfort zone.
http://blogs.wsj.com/metropolis/2013/09/05/remote-control-he...
"A 19-year-old model helicopter enthusiast was killed Thursday when a toy helicopter he was flying struck him in the head, a law-enforcement official said."
I wonder what size drones they are envisioning. For example with a typical prosumer drone out there now, it would be completely obliterated by a large helicopter when coming in contact with the moving blades or hitting the windshield or other parts. Likewise the downdraft of the heli would force down anything of that size in it's path.
After all if a drone is such a threat to a heli then what kind of threat is it to a person that it comes into contact with by accident?
http://archive.defensenews.com/VideoNetwork/2277581414001/Am...
May be true but also could be that the person who decides to sell drugs for less than they could make at McDonalds couldn't even land a job at McDonalds or any other traditional employment. Similar to how many people go into business for themselves because they are not cut out to work for anybody else. It's not all about money and future prospects.
I have noted that if I did everything perfectly (and I am not talking specifically about money) I would never have made any money at all. (Exaggeration for effect.) There are always things that you can think of that seem like a good idea and you can't do all of them. I take the time and put in the money and effort to rotate and store offsite backups. However in all of these years that has never been needed. But God knows we all are aware of a ton of small businesses living on the edge who probably don't have good onsite backups, let alone offsite and they do have information that they need.
Security: I am primarily a business guy (who does some light programming and knows Unix since the 80's) so I hire others to do work for me. I am just thinking that for the people that I have hired in the past how would anyone know if any of this is happening (other than code audits) and what is the mechanism to make sure the right thing happens even if you know what the right thing is? It's kind of a version of the advice "make backups but make sure that you test your backups as well".
"then at a minimum you should verify regularly that the code has not changed (you have to hope that you are looking at the same code that your users see)"
Who exactly is the "you" in the above statement and who pays the "you" money to fix this and keep on top of it on an ongoing basis? And for how long?
In the physical world the different between ideal and practical can be described by my experience with production machinery. The machinery came with guards to protect the operators from getting their hands caught or cut off. The guards also came with switches to prevent the machines from running when the covers were taken off. But what would happen is the operators would want to oil or tweak the machines so they would take the covers off and disable the sensors so that the machine would run bare. Of course you would tell them not to do this, but they would still forget to put the covers back on or be lazy quite often and there was little you could do about it. You had production to get done under deadline and weren't likely to fire someone even though you knew there was a small safety risk in doing this type of thing (older machines of course came with no safety guards at all, operators just had to be careful at their own peril. (And good operators were impossible to find anyway so once you had someone they became a primadonna ..