Comment Re:This will probably be bad (Score 2, Funny) 134
P.S.: because he doesn't know you exist.
Ominous voice: " . . . yet."
P.S.: because he doesn't know you exist.
Ominous voice: " . . . yet."
Nor does he you. What's your point?
It's an argument that he shouldn't have the job he has now, much less be promoted into a job with access to even more sensitive information about us.
Because he had a good personal reason to abuse his access and did so thinking he would never have been caught makes him the perfect man for the job? I disagree--he demonstrated a willingness to misuse a public trust for personal gain that I doubt the passage of time has magically cured so much as made him better at covering his tracks.
I suspect folks with that kind of access who misuse it at least on occasion are far more common than those who don't. What surprises me here, actually, is that there were any checks that resulted in him having been caught in the first place.
I do remember, but they're common as dirt now, so the example is just fine--you are erring comparing the future to the past. And they were never really all that scarce for people that had more than one or two friends who were in the circle of enthusiasts.
. . . but someone should have to fall on his or her sword over this. If those field agents acted on their own, it would be they; if not, then whoever they worked for that authorized the tactics should be holding a sign saying "WILL WAND YOUR CROTCH FOR FOOD."
Just a marketing gimmick to make people feel elite. Invites will be about as scarce as Gmail invites.
If someone buys the phone with the subsidy then subsequently leaves T-mo and pays the ETF, will T-mo unlock the phone? Also, is the ETF prorated? In any case, it seems that the combination of a cheap phone for voice and a netbook/laptop + WiFi or if ubiquitous access is necessary a data stick are a better deal for the money.
"I am, therefore I am." -- Akira