Despite the high news coverage that large breaches receive, and despite tales told by their friends about losing their laptops for a few days while a malware infection is cleared up, employees generally believe they are immune to security risks. They think those types of things happen to other, less careful people.
Untrained users are not the cause of large breaches. Malware infections happen to even the most careful users. In other words, training users and trying to change your company's culture won't make a significant difference.
Encrypt the laptop before a user can touch it. Make sure a decent virus scanner is running (and keep your fingers crossed). Get well trained sysadmins who see their job as keeping your network and servers as secure as reasonably possible.
As I read ATT's announcement, they've committed to four cities and are in discussions with twenty one more.
The response seems to be "They haven't committed to spending any money this year in those twenty one cities, this is clearly bogus!". Geez, don't they have anything important to write about?
If your net worth is over 2 million, you are wealthy. If your net worth is more than your age in thousands, you are middle class. Otherwise, you are poor. I don't care if you make $300,000 a year, if your net worth is negative,you are poor.
That is a reasonable definition of wealth. But I suggest that a person with a $300K/yr income will (usually) have a better lifestyle than someone sitting on $2M with no other income.
This is an article in The Economist. That publication is one of the very few that can honestly claim to be Progressive.
That sometimes it is better to "sell" your achievements than actually work to achieve something.
Brown nosing the boss has been around forever. But the concept of working hard to get ahead isn't "wrong at so many levels".
A study in 2006 revealed that Americans with a household income of more than $100,000 indulged in 40% less “passive leisure” (such as watching TV) than those earning less than $20,000.
I'd rather work for free rather than sit on a couch watching television.
"ex boyfriend" is relevant in this context. She's claiming she was bullied by a coworker at GitHub. If fact she's having relationship issues with an ex-boyfriend who also also worked at GitHub, and has caused additional problems for herself by dating the friend of a GitHub manager and getting into a pissing contest with the manager's wife over that relationship.
That said, GitHub management should have sat everyone down and told them to act like adults or find somewhere else to work, her included.
Physicists can, for example, tell you how fast a given object will accelerate when a force is applied to it.
Social scientists cannot tell you how each individual person will respond to an incentive, but they can tell you roughly how a certain percentage of a population will respond; knowing that is enough to influence the behavior of a group of people.
LaJoie fits the typical profile of an egg freezer: They’re great at their jobs, they make a ton of money, and they’ve followed all of Sheryl Sandberg’s advice. But the husband and baby haven’t materialized
Apparently it isn't so much about not wanting to have babies earlier, it's more about "all the good men are married or gay". Once a person (man or woman) is out of school it becomes increasingly difficult to find a spouse; moving into higher income brackets makes it much more difficult - mostly you need to wait for the mid-life crisis to free some up through divorce.
Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (5) All right, who's the wiseguy who stuck this trigraph stuff in here?
