I thought that Nokia was a Japanese company. Maybe with the Japanese electronics boom of the eighties they were happy to let that misconception persist.

They're physically proprietary. They're smaller than 3.5" floppies.

Or a burglary of any computer geek's residence that's been in this since the days of DOS 5.0...

I still have a couple of 5.25" floppy drives. I'm not proud of this, but I just can't quite bring myself to throw them away, just in case I need them. I still have a 3.5" floppy drive in a computer that I use regularly, and I still have my SCSI internal Zip Drive and my SCSI internal Jaz2 drive, though those aren't actually installed in anything running at the moment.

And my wife is still annoyed that her old Smith-Corona word processor's floppies are proprietary, and she has no way of reading some of the research papers she did in high school and college. We still have the media, but no word processor.

And if e-mail on the corporate internal LAN/WAN never touches the public Internet then even if someone brings in a USB FOB with an infection, it won't readily spread automatically.

Hence two separate networks.

If it's that important, then the employees should be able to handle having two separate systems, one for internal use only, one for external use only.

This is totally a trolling lawsuit. I mean, just look at their website.

It's fucking stock wordpress.

Maybe they're just being frugal. Maybe they're trying to pass on as much money to the artists they represent as possible.

If the average score was 95%, then wouldn't that mean that the general field of scores was falling somewhere in the 100%-90% range, possibly with disproportionately more above 95% to offset those falling below 90%?

Frankly, the danger is that we can't really know what the actual scores, without the pervasive cheating, would have been. There might well be 30% that passed that would have failed without cheating.

If over 50% of the participants were able to cheat, then it sounds like they need to work on their testing procedures in addition to their scoring metric. In this day and age it's not all that difficult to random-generate tests and source questions from sets so that one set may have 30 questions that apply to the same topic and three are randomly chosen; it means that for a 100 question tests there'd need to be probably a thousand questions grouped into sets, but if it's that important then it's not unrealistic to do the major work once and to maintain it properly from then on out.

I'm well-aware that keeping employees busy with enough work and having enough oversight to help keep them on-task is important, but reducing distraction is also important. There's more than one contributing factor to inefficiency. I can suggest remedies for this one.

...until software and systems security is finally taken seriously. That may mean corporate LANs interconnected between sites by leased private fiber, where ther entire computer system for the company is not able to even reach the public Internet. That may mean that users have separate systems, one for internal communication within the company, and one for external communication to outsiders. That may also mean that companies stop allowing anything sensitive on public-reachable computers, and it might even mean that corporate IT departments have to look at hardware that doesn't allow for secure computers to even plug into regular, public networks, and for those 'regular' networks to be highly monitored and partially locked-down as to what IP ranges (and countries) can even be communicated with.

I can tell you one thing, if such a system were implemented there'd probably be an uptick in efficiency as now it'd be a lot harder to screw around at work. Sure, a lot of people would be really pissed that they can't do non-work tasks at work without using a system seeing such monitoring too, but given that salaries in the defense sector are generally pretty good, that's a tradeoff that one could probably stomach.

The constitution is the law you dumbass. No other law is needed or is superior. The fourth amendment and other [un/en]umerated rights prohibits search and seizure upon your life without reasonable suspicion and backed by warrant.

It's a real shame that the Supreme Court doesn't really agree with you.

Given how many residents of Boston are already scared of the places in contention for the new factory, I don't see a problem with this...

Of course not! Would you voluntarily give up a tool that was handed to you when you started your job, without a replacement provided?

That's the entire point of having separate branches of government.

I believe it's possible to have more than 100% blame for a situation.

Those that shot-down a civiian airliner deserve 100% of the blame for shooting it down. That's a given.

Those that provided weapons without providing proper training deserve some blame.

Those that gave orders in the heirarchy to the crew that fired the missile deserve blame, even if they weren't actively involved in the choice to engage the target.

Those that chose to fly through that region also deserve some blame. Not as much blame, but some.

And honestly, I don't have a problem with the concept of blaming, at least to a small extent, the victim. That doesn't mean that one should shame the victim, but from situations as insignificant as not maintaining situational awareness when walking through a rough neighborhood and being mugged to as large as flying through a warzone all have a kernel of blame attributable to the victim, in that the victim's choices assisted in being victimized. The world is a harsh place, and while the perpetrators of violence are 100% responsible, there's still more blame to assign to some of those that fail to take basic steps to protect themselves or those in their charge.

Well, since the party whose member is placing the hold has to at least make that known, if there's bipartisan support in the House and the Executive Branch is on board, I don't expect such a hold to go over very well. This might be one of the few things that both parties agree on and that neither party could really use as leverage against the other in an election year, as the public is starting to get upset across the board about it too.

I've lost my faith in Riddle to make anything good.

I'm just worried that he'll insist that the protagonist is a replicant or something like he did for Blade Runner, when there really isn't that vibe in Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?. He admitted in an NPR interview that he never read the book before making that movie, so I don't think that he's qualified to make such declarations.

Good. Then it won't accidently time-travel when it's borrowed to attempt to escape from terrorists that are unhappy about their pinball machine...