Well... Time to use facebook system against them. They currently have 881 likes. Time for all those people that "liked" their page to unlike it. This would be one easy way to send them and their advertisers a message.....

California actually has laws governing this if personally identifiable information or medical info is breached. Unfortunately many companies do not know about these laws or do not follow them. Also, by the nature of how the law is worded, it may effectivly affect companies all over the US (anyone that does buisness with CA or a CA resident)...

1798.29
http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/appndxa/civil/civ1798_29.htm

1798.82
http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/appndxa/civil/civ1798_82.htm

This seems like a reoccuring theme....

Another account of the issues with the Windows Phone app store is also mentioned by a Developer working for Ceton (though the posts are from his personal blog...)

Blog post detailing the problem: http://www.motzwrit.es/post/33309406053/a-broken-process
Initial thread discussing delays in the process: http://www.thegreenbutton.tv/forums/viewtopic.php?f=63&t=3093

This also can be applied to video games. I tend to stay away from "download only" games and get the physical media versions just for that reason. This is why it annoys me that some of the console game publishers are now going to a model where to play online you need an "online pass" or keycode that can only be used once to enable functionality that in the past would have been considered as part of the package.

Unique accounts should be required. But not "real names". The problem is that many HR departments (I know of at least one that does not admit to doing it but I know for a fact does) will as part of their research/vetting of a potential employee actually check for the name/email/phonenumber on resume on MANY online sources (myspace, facebook, google, and USENET) at the very least.

The problem is that once the information is out there, there is no way to control what it is used for. Many poeple that were active on usenet in the 90s would never have thought that their posts would last longer than the longest USENET retention period of the time. Google ended up purchasing dejanews and all their backup spools (http://googlepress.blogspot.com/2001/02/google-acquires-usenet-discussion.html) to be included in googles archives. [BTW; Google also aquired MANY other backups of USENET spools from other sources as well to round out gaps in their archives]

- An innocent comment about "Apple" now for example may cost someone their job in 3-5 years when Apple buys out the company that they work for which is currently competition...

Another problem that I have with Real Name requirement is that it would make it extremely easy for the crooks to impersonate someone and commit identity theft.....

The one that I see that will be having issues is not Walmat, but Best Buy and maybe even Frys. The question is how will they adapt.. (Frys might be able to do it, but I doubt best buy has the agility...

I had already disabled the automatic update. Currently running regular firmware 2.0.37.131047

I wanted to download the latest 2.0.37 to make sure I had a "backup" of the firmware....

Problem is, at least for the E4200v2 cisco has pulled 2.0.37 from the official download page. The only way to get it is to call them to complain and get a download link for the pre-cloud firmware, which is now "unsupported"...

:-)

When the ipad3 was released, a reporter from an LA news station (KTLA) was ordered off the "private property" in Pasadena until the "official launch" time...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=SvBWTnaaOrY

I am surprised that it took this long for it to reach /.

Linode.com had already patched the items last month. During an emergency but scheduled update round (took less than 30mins per host) and most users did not notice any issues since they were given more than 7 days advanced notice of the emergency update. [linode uses XEN on intel].

http://blog.linode.com/2012/06/13/xen-security-advisories-and-how-we-handled-them/

They can be fined if any user identifiable medical data was proven to be compromised as a result of the malware.

They also have to do regular internal security scans (IE: Anti Virus scans and other steps) to ensure that they are not infected or allowing people that should not have access to the user identifiable data that they should not)

This also includes regular security training for their staff; which means that the download pages should not have had a "just click on run to install the software"

http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/privacy/hipaa/administrative/privacyrule/adminsimpregtext.pdf

Old news. This has been Neweggs policy for a while now...

http://lxer.com/module/newswire/view/97248/index.html

http://parrot-farm.net/Newegg/Newegg.com%20Horror%20Story.html

I stopped buying computers from them in 2007 as well. (still get the occasinal HD or videocard)...

Front line tech support and supervisors have NO idea what ipv6 is or how to get it to you.

I have Charter cable, and "just for fun", called tech to ask about if they had native ipv6 availible, and if not, if they had better "regional" tunnels or 6rd gateways. Note that I already had the info from http://www.myaccount.charter.com/customers/Support.aspx?SupportArticleID=2665 working with my Linksys E4200v2; I just wanted to see if there was a closer 6rd tunnel gateway to my location. Over 45 mins and no help at all from the support or the supervisor. Neither had any idea about ipv6 even after I directed them to their own internal support article.

Does this mean that there will now be another set of noise with script kiddies trying to create automated scanners to locate these devices, thus adding more junk for me to look through in the logs?

I would say it depends on where the xfinity servers are located. If comcast has the servers on its own network, or has a peering arrangement with the network which xfinity servers are located, it is possible that they are not paying as much for the bandwidth when compared to the bandwidth that is used by their users going to netflix servers. If netflix wants net neutrality on this issue, then they can offer to pay for the bandwidth that connects netflix to comcast.

This reminds me of the old AOL network where content providers paid AOL to be connected to the "premium" access network that enabled AOL users better access. At that time AOL could dictate the terms since it was one of the few games in town which had ALOT of users that the content providers were eager to get their hands on.

A long time ago a local university had really bad connectivity to the internet (it had to go to the "main parent" campus then back out the the internet to reach an ISP that literally was half a mile away. The university and the ISP decided that a "mutual peering" arrangement was beneficial to both since the ISP had more than 70% of the local market at the time and most of the local market communicated in some form with the university servers....

Someone at netflix should have thought of that (peering with comcast/charter/etc) with a "dont charge your users for the cap when connecting to us via the peering connection" deal...

Hulu should also consider that as well....