Or is this an option?

RFC 3280 #4.2.1.11

The name constraints extension, which MUST be used only in a CA certificate, indicates a name space within which all subject names in subsequent certificates in a certification path MUST be located. Restrictions apply to the subject distinguished name and apply to subject alternative names.

...

>

It is an option that was not forced on the root CAs. Essentially none of the public CAs are signing from intermediary CAs with name restrictions applied to their certificates.

Generally the restriction mechanism is only allowed to do something kind of "creepy"; where the root CA essentially "sells" this service to a smaller company for perhaps $50,000 or so and issues a restricted certificate --- that allows whoever bought this service to sign subcerts within certain constraints.

or at least just force via policy certain certificates onto each computer's browser as trusted?

That works fine for Internet Explorer on Windows via group policy.

It doesn't work for Firefox or Java (separate private trusted certificate storage databases).

More importantly: It doesn't work for iPhones, Androids, or macs accessing intranet resourses, or that require a valid certificate to setup Activesync connection.

This isn't really about privacy, though - it's about SouthWest's perogative to refuse service to someone they feel was being abusive.

Their perogative to arbitrarily refuse service ends when they accept your money and enter into an agreement to render service; they essentially can't back out without cause, or they risk being sued for breach of contract and discriminatory actions.

Also, there is this matter of coercing a customer to remove a public message under threat of arrest, that the customer had a right to post.

Airports are NOT public places, particularly the Gates at airports.

They are called places of public accommodation just like restaurants. There is zero expectation of privacy for the employees in areas where there is customer access. Members of the public have access to them. Specifically... any members of the public who have paid a fee and obtained a ticket.

Unless the objects weren't black holes but a massive amount of dark matter which is invisible across the visible light spectrum, and maybe our telescopes saw nothing, but there actually is a finite mass which does not emit light.

and have used the calculus and statistics required for my CS degree precisely never. And honestly there are hardly any professions that need either of these disciplines.

It's not that everyone absolutely has to have the knowledge to get by: it's that it is useful.

You use it, or lose it.

Chances are, in one way or another --- what you learned in Calculus helped you.

Either that, or you never really learned calculus, or you just did the homework, and you forgot about it after the test: instead of exploring.

Things you learned there can make your job easier now, or they can help you accomplish some tasks faster or more accurately, and maybe even do some things you couldn't do otherwise, if you actually learned and retained them.

Don't tell me you write computer software and never had a need to numerically approximate a figure or categorize something probalistically, such as... is it Spam or Not spam? What's the best route to draw on the map to give your user some driving directions?

Which product is the most relevant to recommend to this customer?

Correct. Just waiting for someone to press the big red button and end it all.

Sorry, you're too late. I already subscribed to a competing cloud service which provides the same functionality, only: I can use it from anywhere in the world, and my provider worries about maintenance.

I'll just leave this here:

http://www.redbox.com/instant

This would be like suing a hacker who formatted your company web server and the judge refusing to accept the argument that the damage was harm to reputation and loss of business, and instead only accepting the claim of increased electric bill and wear/tear on the hard drives.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/sa...

Netflix is choosing to fight back over rights fees, with original content, not disks.

There is often a disconnect between what makes sense to an informed individual, and what makes sense to people who bet with their money. Money is saying disks are dead, and rewarding streaming.

Yeah, well they were right on that one. Streaming is the future, Discs are the past for the company. That's where their future lies, that's where their priorites will be going forward. Their challange is to wind down the disc based service as quietly as possible to minimize consumer outrage, which would cause them to choose a different streaming service.