Need to acquire the patent for pitchforks first and shutdown all manufactures.

I have so many non-random notes that don't have room or time for the random one.

After a change, I'm either going to get a few "why don't we have the latest patches" or why did you install the latest major change without the proper approval. Teaching upper management is not easy and I've got a dozen reading summary reports daily and "know" what the monthly patch changes "look like"

1) Find a way to monitor communications around illegal activity (or activity you don't like)
2) Shut it down
3) Criminals find/create a new way to communicate that can't be shut down (or monitored as easily)

I don't think he has the arguments nailed down yet. He needs to toss in some details on how it's used for child porn - that'll get support to shut down just about anything.

A few tweaks here and there, throw out that historical data (it's obviously flawed), and tweak this historical data (it's flawed but we know how to "fix" it) and I can make the model "prove" whatever you want. Now you can justify your vote with "science".

I doubt Portland will do anything like have the models predict outcome of projects for the next 10 years, then if they show success use it for the following 10 years. Instead they'll start spending now because "science" says it's ok.

How long until they announce that they may have found possible evidence that the water could contain an arsenic-based life form. The next time they feel left out and want attention I'd guess.

If Verisign won't do it, some other "reputable" (i.e. trusted by Microsoft OS) CA will sign it. How many users will see that and think "maybe it isn't really IBM".

To make it worse, IBM's IT probably won't want their private key on every hotspot so they will use something like publicwireless.ibm.com. I didn't read the article, so maybe they have a way to handle authentication from a central location (e.g. the ibm.com web server) rather than at each hotspot.

Grocery stores, malls, libraries, public parks - I see rude people everywhere. We all need our name and government ID number tattooed to the forehead, both arms, and back of the neck. Then we'll all behave better everywhere.

As a side benefit we'll be able to get targeted advertisements/marketing directed our way no matter where we are (I guess we'll need an RFID implant in addition to the tattoos)

with 10s thousands of users (large corp, gov't, uni) it's a significant effort to determine if every problem is/isn't related to a release version

That's what my company has (actually more, but fewer users access the dozens of other apps). Multiply that by N browsers (brand/version) and support costs go up even more. And it's not just support costs, but productivity costs after users upgrade to FavoriteBrowser V+1, and something doesn't work so they have to go through support calls/emails before being told that may be fixed in a month so go back to another browser.

We're allowed to use any browser, but if you want support you use IE Vx (where Vx is the version where all major corporate apps have passed QA and support staff has been trained).

I'm sure everyone here can write great web apps that work identically on any browser/device. Unfortunately our app vendors don't all have those skills and we prefer them working on business functionality rather than working on compatibility with next month's chrome,firefox, IE, Opera, Safari releases and the newest version of some web phone that 10 of our employees use.

Hope my prof will let me rewrite it with the new facts.

I still get frequent messages on microsoft's pages saying "if you see the yellow bar with a warning at the top of the page, right-click and install the control". For years they had pages that said "you will get a certificate warning when you press submit. click ok to ignore it and continue."

Too often "process" and tools are used as a substitute for competence. It's VERY easy to follow process and design patterns and use all the latest tools and end up with a brittle design & implementation. It's also easy to create a very similar design/implementation that's is robust and extensible and easy to maintain. And 90% of the people I've worked with over the last 10-12 years wouldn't be able to look at them and determine which is better (they'd most likely say the first is better if they were told the name of the methodology and design patterns used). After a year where the first fails repeatedly (crashes, can't meet new feature deadlines, etc) and the 2nd has been a huge success, they couldn't tell you why.

FBI? Police? Divorce lawyer? Boss? Neighbor? Retailers? Stranger who finds your phone?

You personally may be reason to worry. And any escalation of private data collection needs to be considered carefully - it is just a step, and there will be future steps based on acceptance of this one. Being concerned is probably appropriate, but panicking is probably an overreaction.

But for most of your "enemies" this is not something to worry about. Your wife, boss, and neighbor don't have access to this data unless you end up in court and you probably did something else to tip them off first and in the past they could have hired someone to follow you.

FBI & police have been tracking people pretty well for a long time with credit card purchases, phone taps, security cameras, cell phone location, door-to-door interviews, APBs, etc. If you're running from them, you probably avoid these. But if they want to find out where you were all day last Tuesday when you weren't trying to avoid them, they can probably get as close as google's data.

Stores have been tracking you with credit cards, loyalty cards, etc. They probably don't care what you did all day.

A hacker breaking into google's data may be able to find patterns to know when someone is not at home or is on a deserted street. But it's probably a lot more effort and more dangerous to use that than search for credit cards in the data. They'd want to do a stakeout anyhow to verify so why not pick a target first rather than using location data to pick a random target.

As long as my email travels over AT&T equipment it doesn't really matter if my government manages my mailbox. I have to assume the government has access either way. (Same for most other telcos)