It happens quite a bit actually and FDE is an easy and inexpensive way to protect your firm. It's a heck of a lot cheaper than sending letters to all of your customers telling them you may have just lost their personal information.

...they'll be able to get their old jobs back at Foot Locker?

Sorry...that was mean. There probably are some Geeks that know what they're doing and I'm sure they're brilliant at getting Grandma on Facebook. I just get the call when one of them has screwed up somebody's server or line of business application because they had no idea what they were doing. Which happens way too often.

Considering the ONLY Windows Phone handset they have is the HTC Trophy which is pretty poor compared to modern handsets on Android or iOS.

I can't wait to see the laptop version...

There's just as much, if not more, grant money for people who prove climate change ISN'T man made. You don't think the oil companies aren't at the head of a VERY long line of corporations that would pay handsomely to any scientific group that could actually prove that?

There's no need to falsify info proving global warming if it would be easier to produce evidence DISproving it. Certainly not for financial reasons.

"Americans' sense that Global Warming is the least of their worries right now continues to rise..."

Wow, were you able to type all of that with a straight face?

First of all System32 on my Win7 Ultimate machine is only 2.7GB in size.

Secondly, Microsoft does not own Norton and does not sell any cleanup tools that I've seen.

Just in case anybody was tempted to take you seriously. :)

If the car has power and the "Avatar" is actually working.

Reminds me of the old "Keyboard not found; press F1 to continue" errors.

"What you (and most others here) seem to have missed is that Dropbox generally has absolutely no idea what your content is. Everything is encrypted. How exactly are they distributing your "copyrighted material" when it can't be decrypted?"

Except it *CAN* be decrypted. Dropbox has already admitted that THEY have the encryption keys and they can decrypt (and turn over to the gov't if necessary) your data. If they can decrypt it then they can read it. And that means, according to their terms of service, that they can "use, copy, distribute, prepare derivative works (such as translations or format conversions) of, perform, or publicly display" your data.

The bottom line is simple: By agreeing to their terms of service you are giving them permission to do those things to your data. You can argue all day that they WON'T, but you're effectively signing agreement that says they CAN.

http://www.rolandschorr.com/blogs/index.php/oh-dropbox-we-loved-you?blog=6

Well, actually, if Google asserts the right to your message content (and they do) then the gov't would only need a warrant if Google declined to turn over your e-mail to them.

And I quote:

"11.1 You retain copyright and any other rights you already hold in Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services. By submitting, posting or displaying the content you give Google a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute any Content which you submit, post or display on or through, the Services. This license is for the sole purpose of enabling Google to display, distribute and promote the Services and may be revoked for certain Services as defined in the Additional Terms of those Services.

11.2 You agree that this license includes a right for Google to make such Content available to other companies, organizations or individuals with whom Google has relationships for the provision of syndicated services, and to use such Content in connection with the provision of those services."

Google can choose to turn your e-mail over to the government, or the Chinese or the Scientologists or Lord John Whorfin if they wanted to. This ruling only says if they tell the gov't to sod off that the gov't has to come back with a warrant to compel them to change their tune.

It even pervades information services. I wonder how many people get busted telling their boss or client they're working on Project A because they were on Twitter or Facebook talking about doing something totally different.

Accountability, for better or worse, is rising to a whole new level due to voluntary and involuntary location and presence services.

How embarassing for Texas. Some of the comments made by these Board of Education people just demonstrate a shameful ignorance. And these people were ELECTED?

I can do a lot of things with Office 2010 than I couldn't do with Office 2000. Search folders, RSS, Galleries, better task management, better calendar sharing, better utilization of 64-bit machines....

Windows 7 has some nice advantages as well - it's faster, has better 64-bit support, some nice improvements to the UI (such as pinning items to the taskbar), is more secure...

Are either of them "must upgrades for everybody"? No. Some people will do just fine staying on Windows XP and Office 2000. But a lot of people, especially folks who are power users, will find a lot to like in the new versions.

Shouldn't be doing what? Getting a job or having a home?

Maybe there needs to be a way for her to remove her abusive ex from her list of contacts.