Having patches approved by a CAB should not be a big deal. A brief write-up of the patches to be applied -- or an attachment listing the patches, reasons for applying them, etc -- was all that was required. Every CAB I've ever worked with has a procedure for an emergency like applying a patch for something like Heartbleed. All it usually took was a phone call to certain people and getting a verbal authorization. (You filled out the standard change request forms after the fact.) Working with a CAB is no big deal. Really.

But speaking of pointless paperwork... We had someone in a QA role stand up in front of the IT group and tell us that they wanted a screen shot of every single patch installation for every single server the patch was installed on. (And the rest of the QA team nodded their heads in unison like robots.) When it was pointed out that the length of time required for making a separate screen shot -- signed and dated by hand to boot -- for each of the patches in your typical Microsoft service pack times hundreds and hundreds of servers and that such a process would be prohibitive (to say the least) they eventually backed off. If that initial request wasn't bad enough, they actually wanted the process to be: Install the first patch, take the screen shot, print it, label it, sign and date it. Only after those steps were completed would you move onto the next patch or server. If their plan had been implemented the company would have had to build a new building just to house the printed screenshots.

Not since the Reagan administration. What actually makes the big news story is when an acquisition/merger is actually denied.

Not that AT&T will sit back and let this happen. It would be surprising if they weren't already hard at work lobbying their bought-and-paid-for Congresscritters to cut funding to any and all government agencies that would enforce this auction decision.

The NSA's job is not to spy on Americans regardless of whether they have a warrant or not. Spying on Americans is the FBI's job.

Exactly. My equipment, my use rules. If someone from work wants to call me on my smartphone, fine. Let's face it, there are times when we might need to be reached after hours. But I'm not going to use it as an extension of the company's infrastructure. If the company wants to invest in a dedicated smartphone that is tied to their infrastructure, that's fine, too. But we're going to be negotiating about comp time.

``Because everyone but the courts seems to understand that there is value in a familiatr place just because it is familiar''

The homeowners will likely do well in the lower courts where their peers will likely see things in the same light as the victims. Unfortunately, once the appeals begin, the homeowners no longer have access to juries of their peers. If it gets all the ways to the Supremes, well, the results are heavily skewed in favor of the corporations. Something like 80+% of all cases are found in favor of corporations.

Solutions? Perhaps eliminating being able to appeal a court decision because you don't like the size of the monetary damages. Appeals need to be about -- and only about -- actual misuse of the law or blatant mistakes in the court proceedings, etc. And you get one appeal; no more. Of course, bringing back the corporate death penalty would do wonders to improve corporate behavior so that these incidents might be fewer and farther between. Of course, IANAL so I can't predict whether any of this is possible but something tells me that none of this would ever happen as it would serve to reduce the number of legal proceedings and all the billing that those bring. The laws seem to be written to benefit lawyers not the average person.

Just consider the amount of money that will be required to excavate one of the homeowner's lawn to remove the contaminated soil, replace the soil, grade it properly, and replant the grass. That could easily exceed $10K/lawn. And they're offering the homeowners a breakfast burrito and a few bucks for their trouble?

This is the third pipeline leak that I've heard of in as many (or fewer) weeks. Just where is the pipeline safety track record that these industry spokesweasels refer to?

On a somewhat-related note (well, "oil + pipelines" so close enough): Imagine what sort of damage will be done by a leak of the proposed oil sands pipeline if that corrosive gunk finds its way into the aquifer used by the majority of the Midwest and the huge amount of farming that occurs there. A leak of that proposed pipeline would cause damage that could never be repaired. Plus say goodbye to a good chunk of the food supply when that water is unusable.

``Hardly a crash dump, but easily enough to get across the essentials.''

Here's a crazy idea: instead of working on displaying cutesy graphics images that need to be decoded using a smart phone and a web site, what about actually generating a freakin' crash dump? Is there a technical reason that Linux is unable to do this? If crash dumps are really not possible, how about a plain 'ol text file in the root directory containing the reason for the crash/panic?

Take a look at the authors of those papers. The same names keep showing up in paper after paper after paper. Looks pretty fishy. Makes you wonder just who the "peers" are who are reviewing those papers.

If Samsung loses this decision, anyone want to guess what the basis of their appeal will be?

Was it not possible to come up with an instructional video that used fictional companies, inventions, etc. to instruct the viewers? Using Apple products -- or any other well-known vendor's produts -- as examples was not terribly bright.

``... or having passengers talking to you cause accidents.''

I avoided talking to the driver altogether when that driver was my father-in-law. An ex-salesman, he had the extremely annoying habit of wanting to look you in the eye when he was talking to you while driving... even if you were sitting in the back seat. Eventually, I insisted on driving when we went anywhere. I was afraid he'd run us into a utility pole.

``Semi truck drivers use a CB heavily and also dont.''

But those are professional drivers and are far more likely to be taking their driving a lot more seriously than the average driver. I find truck drivers -- at least the ones I encounter on the interstates -- to be among the most courteous and careful drivers around. (OTOH, local delivery truck drivers are some of the worst).

Talking on handhelds while driving is supposed to be illegal in Illinois yet I continue to see people yakking on their cellphone while trying to make left turns in heavy traffic.

Microsoft: "Hey! Look what we found in the back of the closet! Anyone want it?"

Great gesture, eh? MS is at least 10 -- and more like 20 -- years too late in doing this. Just why do they think anyone is going to want this code nowadays? One doubts that it really has any value to anyone -- which I'm certain is why they're doing it -- but it doesn't have much in the way of PR value either.

... that the photos from the annual awards banquet and the monthly meeting minutes from the Rotary Club could be NSFW?

Years ago, the web site for a local IT group -- who'd nominated our CIO for an industry award -- was being blocked by the corporate web filters that were marking it as "tasteless".

Why do these vendors even try if they're going to fail so spectacularly?

``Keep what in mind, then? That they used to own Volvo and Jaguar? I'm not sure how that is relevant.''

Wasn't it a Ford exec that admitted that their autos' sensors knew when drivers exceeded the speed limit?

(Though I'd guess they meant every time someone drives faster than 55MPH. An outdated limit now, at least in Illinois, as we have 70MPH speed limits away from populous areas.)

... but for a lot of people, moving the data to and from the storage is what's really going to be costly. It'll be interesting to see how much of that disk space ends up going unused when word gets around about how much users get clobbered with data overage charges by AT&T, et al trying to use the cheap disk space.

I very nearly gave up on it when I saw "ORI". Shouldn't that "R" have been "S"? Or did the OP, all of a sudden, start talking about a different government office?