It's the lazy people that cant be bothered to actually cook, and use fast food as the convenient scapegoat.
It's not that they're lazy - it's that they can either spend that hour getting / keeping another part-time job, or they can spend it cooking. Working at a part-time job will pay their rent. Spending an hour cooking will not. Remember that $50 (minimum wage for 8 hours after taxes) is a BIG DEAL to these people.
It's hard to imagine that putting data "in the cloud", whatever that happens to mean in the particular case under discussion, could be any less secure than where they're already storing your data.
Exactly. The amount of risk that is introduced by putting your data into the cloud is infinitesimal compared to the risk that already exists in your network due to your company's cultural lack of top-down focus on security. If your CEO has domain admin privileges to the network and does not actively manage the active directory structure, you probably have more serious security issues to worry about.
I am a current security expert, working at a security-conscious company. So far, I haven't seen any hypervisor exploits, so the largest source of failure from hosting your business in the cloud probably rests on being unable to access data because of your ISP or network outages. Shop around by comparing SLAs.
When hypervisor exploits do become known (and they will), the PCI council will likely put the hypervisor into scope - they're waffly about it right now. As soon as that happens, kiss your PCI-compliant cloud goodbye - the third-party compatibility for security tools used for PCI compliance in the cloud are abysmal. It will become very difficult for any cloud-based application to live up to the PCI standards. That's your real risk.
If buy 'a lot of money' you mean making more then 50K, or own a home.
Pretty much - if you're making $50k by yourself then with both parents working your household income should be around $80-90k. That's quite a hunk of change and well above the median household income.
If you own a house and you're being reasonable about your debt limits (no more than 25% of your monthly income after taxes going to your house) then your household income should be at least $50k. If you're not making that much money, you should be living in an apartment.
The best they could do was a tax plan that effectively lowered the tax rates on the richest people while eliminating many itemized deductions that benefited the rest of us!
Generally speaking, poor folk and even most of the middle class do not itemize their deductions. First, it takes too much of their time they need to be out making money with, and second, they get more money taking the standard deduction.
Itemized deductions are for people with a lot of money, or those running their own business with lots of business expenses.
I wrote my senators and representative, and told them I oppose SOPA and PIPA. It may not be much, but it is worth it and it is ridiculously easy now that they have websites that accept messages.
Have you voiced your opinion, other than on some website that the policy makes never see?
You mean like their website that accepts messages, which they never read? No, not really. That would require effort.
I swear, I've sent one of my state senators an email saying how opposed I was to a bill and I got a form letter back saying, 'Thank you, I agree that that this issue is of vital national importance and will do everything in my power to see this legislation passed.'
They don't read those. Nobody in the senate actually reads their email. Go out and vote for third party candidates. They pay attention to polls.
Because obviously people who have worked all their life and finally retired are in no position to call someone else 'lazy'?
Now hang on, later the same infographics say that the Tea Party makes more money per year? How can you make more money while being unemployed?
When all is said and done, though, I think the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street will agree on one basic principle: The people who committed vast amounts of financial fraud should be in jail, and we are not doing enough to find them.
Tax poverty! Tax drugs!
You know, taxing poverty isn't that bad of an idea. For every % of people below the poverty line, the top 1% bracket of income earners have their taxes increased by 1%.
I bet that would reduce poverty WAY fast.
Then band together with other citizens who believe the same as you. Build organizations with these other people. Go out and meet your community and fight for what your community believes in. Get enough people together, take donations, and start putting up the billboards and TV ads you need to implement the change you want.
The sooner we can get rid of Flash, the better. Bring on the HTML5, which will have no security vulnerabilities whatsoever!
Given the vast disconnect between society's common opinion on data piracy and the large fines and penalties being pursued in the legal system by copyright holders, do you think the 'unlocking' argument could lead towards more leniency in civil cases involving copyright violations, or will that be confined to purely criminal violations?
With the latest bandwidth caps I'm seeing on my provider (AT&T U-verse), I can download data at a rate of 250 GB per month. So it'll take me 45 YEARS to fill up that 135 TB array. Something tells me they'll have better storage solutions by then.
In the meantime, I'm just waiting for Google to roll out the high-speed internet in my locale next year - maybe then I'll have a chance at filling up my current file server.
I don't know about this particular jurisdiction, but in many places, 911 is also used for cell-center type stuff you'd think you'd get by calling the station. Seattle, for example. Need a copy of the police report from an accident? If you call the station, they'll tell you to call 911 to order a copy.
And yes, I think that's pretty boneheaded.
When they don't find it at Fermilab, and they don't find it at the LHC, they'll just say we haven't got enough power yet, and we need to build another one with even more power.
The Higgs doesn't exist. The arguments for it sound just like the arguments of the 'ether' back in the 1900's. The standard model is wrong. Go back and fix it with pen and paper before spending a few trillion dollars trying to figure out why scientists can't do math.
Why not eliminate the threat entirely? 'Reducing the risks' just does not gut it in the security industry.
Because in order to eliminate the risk entirely, you will have to shoot the user in the head. They are the largest security risk in any scenario. Requiring encryption won't eliminate your mom from handing you the already logged-in device to troubleshoot it for her.
Secondly, violating international waters legitimises attacks. It gives the attackers reason to say "they strayed into our territorial waters and opened fire on us" and legitimises the price tag they ask for ships and lives because essentially, the cargo vessel commuted an act of war.
Staying legally kosher when shooting up shit on the water is very fucking important.
If the attackers are saying the cargo vessels are straying into our territorial waters and opening fire when they attempt to board the vessel, then they're representatives of their government and committing an act of war by boarding a foreign nation's vessel and killing its crew, and we should treat this as an act of war and declare war on Somali.
If they are not representatives of their government, then Somali should be actively taking measures to eliminate piracy in their waters.
Since Somali is obviously not actively taking measures to eliminate piracy in their waters, the government is either in direct collusion with the pirates, and they are acting as privateers under tacit Somali authorization, or the government is incapable of enforcing their borders, thus not a legitimate nation, and we should have no need to comply with their borders in order to defend our ships.
Math is like love -- a simple idea but it can get complicated. -- R. Drabek
