Try having text-to-speech read you a flash-based site some time. So much for ADA compliance on the web. HTML5 will encourage sites to fix this.
You're misunderstanding what FIPS 140 covers. FIPS 140 says nothing about authentication systems, only cryptographic modules. I can write a module using a certified FIPS 140 cryptomodule and encrypt everything with the same key-- 0x0 -- and the system is still FIPS-compliant.
FIPS 140 doesn't cover authentication systems, FIPS 140 only covers cryptography. They got the crypto right, but the authentication system was a sham.
Common Criteria certification would cover the authentication system. Note these drives carry no CC certification.
...and the light on top (vertical hang) or to the left (horizontal hang) is *red*. That's actually law too, IIRC.
What he said.
Most engineers are too narrowly educated. As a result, they're ill-equipped to construct counter-arguments when they encounter a line of non-engineering bullshit.
I recall a conversation I had with my department chair as an undergrad (I ran into him on the T). He was considering altering the curriculum and adding a slate of new technical requirements, but it would have to be at the expense of humanities requirements. I advocated instead expanding the program to a five-year degree instead, because I felt (and feel) that an education in humanities is vital for all science and engineering students--if only because they teach students how to *explain things to others*, something that's so incredibly important once you're out in the real world working as a science or engineering professional.
And since the null-termination cert *doesn't chain to an EV provider* it's not much of an exploit, really. No green bar, not safe.
It's actually called "base rate fallacy."
Or do you mean for a job?
The two are not necessarily the same.
I found languages like Lisp, Prolog, and Smalltalk to be of the most use for learning the science. These are not your sweatshop languages, though.
On the plus side, if you learn the science, learning a new language isn't tough.
Failure of a current government to perform is not the same thing as government *as an institution* being incapable of performing.
Feel free to propose an alternative to a government that accomplishes this task and doesn't rely on proven-ineffective industry self-policing and yet *isn't* just government by another name.
I hope you won't mind if I don't wait around.
You're right, they aren't. But under a truly 'free' market as defined by our libertarian friends, you have no recourse if any of them happen.
The issue isn't free markets it's, *fair* markets. Only the gov't keeps markets fair. Free markets are like anarchies; they immediately devolve into strong-man rule--in market terms, that's cartels and monopolies. The history of abuse by business in the absence of gov't enforced rules is long, and at this point should be obvious to anyone.
Spoken like a man who's never been seriously ill. Or poor. Or fired without cause. Or blackballed. Or discriminated against.
A free market does have a point: to set prices. That's it. The 'invisible hand' is a delusion, and the anyone who thinks such a system inevitably maximizes efficiency needs to (a) define his terms, and (b) google the phrase 'local maxima.'
Allegedly, Clippy annoyed people into looking in the help files to figure out how to turn him off. That led them to discover that the help file actually was helpful. This reduced the give-away service calls by some measured percent.
Probably not Clippy's intended purpose, but there you go.