This is moot as long as this equipment will be exclusive to the US military. An immobile ground based gun platform will not reach any target of interest of the US.
Security is in place to keep out crowds of people who aren't supposed to be there, and they seemed to do well enough at that.
In my opinion this guy earned his way into the conference fair and square. If I were organizing a security conference and someone got past the security undetected then I'd assume they are part of my targeted audience. A booth with badges "If you got this far you get a free pass." would be a fine touch on an event like that.
Yes! I've been asked if I'm alright, and know where I'm at. To the latter, I respond: "Yes. I'm right here!"
If I got a response like that, from a person staring off in the distance I'd only feel reassured and head on my way and fast.
I really don't think you can mistake a Galaxy for an iPhone when it has "Samsung" written on it right on the front. Anyone who can't tell the difference between the two, isn't in the market for either of them.
- Novell: Compiz, XGL (unmaintaned X server with OpenGL)
- Red Hat: PulseAudio, Clutter, DeviceKit, Cheese, gnome-user-share
Notice something about the scopes of each of those projects?
Same thing with Compiz, a compositing window manager developed by David Reeveman of Novell, also rejected despite it being an almost complete drop in replacement for Metacity which is ancient RedHat technology.
Metacity ancient? What do you make of the whole X server then? Should we replace it too? Don't get me wrong. I don't dismiss Compiz as eye-candy because it's far more than that. It came way to early. It was unusable without proprietary drivers and unstable with. To this day Compiz has problems with stability on anything but maybe Intel boards. The necessary groundwork just isn't there yet.
Losing something and using the court system to get it back can be too expensive for individuals or home-based businesses. SSL is cheaper than a lawyer.
Most data is useless and once it's "out" you won't get it back anyway. I'm talking about using self-signed certificates for data that isn't really worth encrypting in the first place but can act as a tripping alarm or honey pot. Granted you're in deep, if you have to resort to this kind of tactic but it's there if you need it.
With effort, and sometimes a trivial amount, one can invade on another's privacy. But we've all made a social agreement to respect privacy; all it takes is a humble token, like a window curtain, to remind us of this. The curtain is just cloth, but it does an excellent job of affording us privacy, because it asserts our intent. That way, if we're able to detect it, we can be certain in knowing that our privacy is violated -- otherwise, any access we didn't think to deny (but would regret later) might accidentally intrude upon us -- and with no ill will from the innocent onlooker! How foolish of us, that we didn't draw the curtain when we had the chance!
What if the Pentagon is telling the truth and releasing these documents would cause "serious damage to national security" and people die as a result of your decision?
He will be eligible to work there?
Experts in a given field can and often feel that their expertise on a narrow topic carries over to the entirety of human knowledge. People listening to those experts fall into the common trap that their confidence always stems from experience.