Nowadays, and even back then I suppose, these were called penetration testing and incident response plan/business continuity plan exercises. These are a standard practice that should be in the year clock of every security minded organization.

This is easy, obviously the language should be english spoken really slowly and loudly, everyone understands that, right?

Doing those things will make you popular. The fact that people who are open, not selfish and overly dramatic may have more friends probably has nothing to do with this.

I feel it's ignorant and arrogant to assume that none of our actions have consequences. The latest studies actually suggest that for the past 10000 years we've been moving towards a new ice age, and there's compelling evidence that the reasons why it has stalled and later reversed were agriculture and industrialization.

No, searing doesn't work. what you do is use ultra-slow cooking, where a joint of meat is cooked for up to 24 hours so as to contain the fat content while preventing collagen molecules from re-forming within the meat.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnsgPa2wyGE

1. Apply the Principle Of Least Privilege (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_least_privilege). Make sure all users have basic user accounts, not admin rights. Most malware runs in the context of the logged on user, if the user account doesn't have access to modify system files or install services, neither will the malware.

2. Make sure you have working patch management. Install all security updates asap.

3. Have up-to-date antivirus/antimalware software. Yes, number 3. This is less important the other 2, but still paramount.

Security is not a state nor a technology, it's a process, and you'll never reach 100% protection. The above, however, should be (properly implemented) enough for most organizations. Awareness training, NAC/NAP, IDS/IPS, proxies and application layer firewalls etc are all helpful, but those 3 are IMO the essential ones.

From George Monbiot's response to the CRU leak:

Taken out of context some of the emails may look bad, but all he is saying is that they want to stop publications that have been proven faulty from appearing in a report that's used pretty much as a definitive guideline for how to deal with climate change. They're having a hard time convincing world leaders to act as it is, they don't need any additional distractions. Unethical/unprofessional? Somewhat. Condemning or making anything related to their research questionable? Hardly. I bet if granted access to anyone's private emails over a number of years, _any_ kind of conspiracy or federal offense could be "proven".

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5BS2UO20091229

"Since Motorola Inc launched a patent attack on Nokia in 1989, the Finnish firm has built one of the mobile industry's widest patent portfolios. Only Ericsson and Qualcomm Inc have comparable portfolios."

Nokia has something like the 5th or 6th largest patent portfolio in telecom equipment and the largest in the mobile industry in the world. I somehow don't think Nokia is the one that should be worried.

Do you work for TSA by any chance?