It doesnt matter if those countries get 100 bucks if 99 of them end up going back to cost of manufacturing.

Part of "cost of manufacturing" is paying workers. There and here. So it does matter. When my $100 goes there instead of here, our economy takes a hit. Tiny, sure, but when it's thousands or tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of "whatever", then it's no longer a tiny hit.

That remark was hackneyed.

This. A thousands times this. Should be modded to positive infinity.

How do you get shell access on your average Mac without physical access? SSH isn't enabled by default as has been pointed out. In fact, it's been a real PITA to get the versions of OS X I've configured to play nice on the network for the command line. I doubt one user in a thousand has done it -- slashdot mac users not being significantly representative of the average mac users, of course. My macs have SSH available, but the port isn't open to the Intertubes outside of my LAN, so it doesn't concern me very much.

So this essentially resolves to a "you have to be there" exploit.

Exactly so.

Clearly, that's not what I said.

Random data point == random data point

not

Random data point == confirmation of "there's no problem" stance

Try for comprehension next time. You'd be amazed what you can learn if you actually, you know, understand what you read.

Bees are all over the place at my home (basically at the center of a small town in rural Montana.) We have quite a few planters full of flowers on our largish deck (about 1000' sq), and it is not uncommon to go out there and see a very large number of bees going about their business. They are nearly zero threat. Well, unless you sit on one. :) We try not to do that.

There are no obvious hives anywhere nearby, and they seem to come and go from all points of the compass.

Sortof-kinda related, there are local honey merchants, and the honey is just lovely.

Think of the football player from this planet! They would be about 3 feet high and enormously strong

Yeah, but if it did that to them, it'd do the same thing to the cheerleaders, then there would be no reason to watch the game -- unless you have a gnome fetish.

Seems like it is: "the attacker already has to have local access"

That's what I was working off of, anyway.

Network-imposed exploits are something else entirely.

Furthermore, local access pretty much is the end of the road anyway. Boot from the right CD with a custom filesystem that ignores HD filesystem permissions and yet allows you to set them any way you want, system is now wide open. Replace a few choice commands that you know are going to run, and bang, fully compromised. And that's just one of the many easy ways in to access as the system stands. You can also copy off the entire HD, or for that matter, erase it. Or both. You can compromise a command for a way in, copy an otherwise encrypted volume and walk off with it, break the encryption at your leisure, then use the previously installed compromise to get in and cause mayhem.

If you don't have physical security and there is any kind of local threat of compromise, you could become toast at any time. These kinds of "threats" are insignificant in the larger scheme of things. If you need local security, the only sufficient mechanism is to physically deny access to the computer.

HPV is listed as an STD, and really only becomes an issue when two or more incompatible strains interact - meaning, multiple partners within relatively short periods, again - a lifestyle choice.

Because you can quite easily get HPV sexually, that makes it an STD -- a "Sexually Transmitted Disease." But you can also get it via casual contact. Which you cannot control. Also, and rather finally, as you can't control other people's behavior or contacts, nor promise your behavior or contacts will keep you clear of this, it needs vaccination. Just the numbers alone tell you HPV needs vaccination: A 50% infection rate in the general population. No set of excuses can make that number go away. But vaccination can.

I strongly suspect that if "everyone" were to get on Google+, by which I mean to imply a Facebook-level of adoption, it would pretty much automatically ruin itself.

But I've been wrong before. Why, I remember back in 1959 when I thought I'd left my panda bear on the bed, but actually it was in the playroom. I was totally wrong. What a lesson that was!

society breaks down in 50 years and is utterly gone in 100 years, if no one has children

Who said anything about "no one having children"? There are some countries with (barely) negative population growth, but that is not even close to "no one having children."

people who raise children deserve credit: they are investing in the future of civilization

Meh. Civilization, in the sense of "people today, different people tomorrow, in an overall sense, is driven -- hard -- by the instinct to breed. I don't see it as something you should get "credit" for. If that's how you want to roll, fine.

What I'm talking about is the ability to exert control over your own reproductive system. You're a working person, you have a kid, likely you're no longer qualified to be a working person, because you now have a whole new set of responsibilities. If you are wealthy enough to slough those off on someone else (nannies, etc.) that's fine. Or if you're supporting a spouse who will carry that load. Otherwise, you're basically crippling your ability to be productive at work. From long nights up with baby to a whole slew of other responsibilities and necessities, some of which will extend past a decade, you will be less effective at your job, only assuming you were effective at it in the first place.

Birth control gives people a choice: They can pursue normal life without abstinence, yet slew the odds strongly in favor of not getting pregnant. It's no longer a general given that the mating process means high odds of pregnancy. Instead, we can control the when, and thereby large portions of the quality of the outcome.

Personally, I reserve giving "credit" to those people who plan the raising of children such that they are available, secure and ready for the task when they undertake it. Not when they punch a hole in the middle of their job responsibilities by pulling the "preggers" card. Furthermore, I think bringing an unwanted child into the world is downright awful.

While I am all for workplace equality, I see it as going both ways: If you do something that makes you less good at what you do than someone you could be replaced by, your job is at risk, and legitimately so in my view. Pregnancy, drug intoxication on the job (and that includes alcohol), not being where you're supposed to be when you're supposed to be, etc.

I have met many heteros who, thinking (I don't know why) that I want to hear about it (perhaps because I am hetero), like to confide details of all kinds of out-of-work issues, right down to their sex life, or lack thereof. Doesn't bother me, though I really don't find myself inclined to reciprocate on the level of specifics.

If people aren't telling you these things, perhaps you're simply not that approachable. Doesn't mean they aren't telling them to other people. It's ubiquitous in both white- and blue-collar environments.

Hetero or not, I am no more offended by a gay pride shirt than I am a football jersey or Old Navy branded tee, or someone wearing 3D jewelry depicting Christ nailed to a cross. Nor would I decline a gay pride ribbon at this point in time -- or a polygamy / polyamory pride ribbon, come to that. It's past time to push back. Hard.

Honestly, you will be interviewed by people who have no idea what your job is or how to do it.

I have to admit, that does seem to explain the serious problems with Google Base, youtube, GMail, Google+ and Adwords.

You made me laugh. Good for you. I like to start my days that way. :)