It's not my responsibility as an end user to uphold someone else's broken revenue model. I'm responsible for the safety and security of several hundred PCs, not the salaries and expenses of advertising companies.
He's the one that made the claims. He said he did it, and then went to the FBI to explain how he did it. Other than finding the tampered box lid, all the "evidence" is in his claims.
I could knock a panel loose and then claim I hacked the in-flight entertainment system and made an airplane into a sperm whale and then a potted plant. That doesn't make it real, even if I showed them a box containing an infinite improbability drive. Funny thing about that, when most people see it, they see an empty box. How improbable.
NASA already has the answer. Glitter filled Super Balls are the best thing for the job. As we all know, they are infused with magic energy. A 10kg payload traveling at 11.2 km/s could deflect an object the size of the moon.
It does have risks though. Once set in motion, the Super Balls would be set loose on the universe, potentially disrupting entire galaxies.
For the sake of the universe, I hope we never have to deploy such a weapon.
They also have an abundance of people who wear funny hats.
It depends on how the theoretical spaces work. You can have multiple things in the same space. Just where you're sitting, there is air, light, heat, radio waves, sound waves, gravity, probably a few neutrinos.
I just used "spaces" because I couldn't think of a more appropriate word.
I don't really understand why Apple wants to sell iMacs. They're a huge PITA to service, cost a fortune to ship and aren't particularly more capable than Mac Minis.If there were an Apple product line with a definite justification to end, it would be that one.
You can get an entry-level Mac Mini, sure. It'll be physically larger and it'll be slower. You can also get slower Broadwell NUCs if you're actually price-sensitive enough to make that comparison. Figure that you'll pay $100 for 16GB RAM and $120 for an m.2 SSD + $25 for an Intel or Broadcom wireless card if you think you need one + whatever the barebones box costs ($300 for the Broadwell i3 up to $535 for the Broadwell i7). Apple's pricing on the Haswell Mac Minis is $500, $700, $1000 for an at-best 2.8GHz i5 with 8GB RAM or for a slug-like 1.4GHz ULV i5 with 4GB RAM and a magnetic drive on the low end.
To me it looks like the late 2014 Mac Minis lose out all the way around unless you're THAT hung up on getting OSX preinstalled or think Apple support is magic.
Any mITX rig with stock Intel cooling, a PicoPSU and an mSATA/m.2 SSD actually has plenty of room for airflow since the bulky metal boxes of hard disk and power supply are out of the way. I also find the Antec NSK150, which has a front-mounted PSU, to work well enough for mainstream desktops.
The standards body for the microelectronics industry has found that Solid State Drives (SSD) can start to lose their data and become corrupted if they are left without power for as little as a week. According to a recent presentation (PDF) by Seagate's Alvin Cox, who is also chairman of the Joint Electron Device Engineering Council (JEDEC), the period of time that data will be retained on an SSD is halved for every 5 degrees Celsius (9 degrees Fahrenheit) rise in temperature in the area where the SSD is stored.
Link to Original Source
That's probably the biggest reason to have good in-house security people. They don't have a financial interest to make breaches or lie about them. It's in their best interest to keep everything secure, and continue to look for new ways to attempt breaking into their own stuff.
I've never felt good about letting third parties in to do security testing. When someone above my rank decided to let a 3rd party do external tests, they'll pick anything and make it sound disastrous. One place was bitching about anything.
They complained that we had the current version of Bind running on the DNS servers. "But people can do DNS requests!" Yup.
They flagged the fact that we dropped unwanted traffic at the firewall. Yup. Get over it. They were upset it took forever to scan the network. Good.
They flagged us for having a web server providing static content. They were upset they couldn't find any way to exploit CGIs or do SQL injection. Yup. That was kind of the idea.
There were a whole bunch of other trivial things that they flagged us for. Then they were brought to the office, and got upset that we didn't provide wifi. Nope, that's a security risk. They wanted to plug their laptop into our network, so they were only given external access. Again, they bitched. But letting an unknown computer owned by an unauthorized party plug into our network is a security risk.
They eventually gave up trying to bully us into dropping our security precautions and gave us a pass.
I already habitually ran tests with privileged access to make sure even if all layers of protection failed, nothing really bad could happen.
Honestly, if they are given everything, they can find something. Give them administrative rights to everything, and credentials to everything, they can find something. Like, email accounts can be accessed with full admin rights. Funny how that works.
Yup, if it wasn't Microsoft, all kinds of other companies could have dominated the desktop market. IBM (OS/2), Quarterdeck (DESQview/X), Apple (Mac OS), NeXT (NeXT), any number of *nix companies (X11), and others.
Microsoft got big because they got the consumers interested, and questionable deals with vendors.
Plenty of people only know the tunnel-vision version of computer history and they believe Microsoft is it. They either don't remember (or are too young to have seen) software boxes (ahh, the good ol' days) had logos to indicate which OS they worked on so you could pick the right one.
Saying "We're sure he had..." without evidence is not evidence. They have to have the evidence that he actually *did* have what is claimed.
That's the hard part. They have to gather the evidence to get the conviction. Without evidence, they can't get a conviction. At least if you have a competent attorney. If you have a crappy one, you'll get the 5 years because they talked you into taking a pre-trial plea agreement. That's how innocent people go to jail.
My read on the "IRS Scandal" is that conservative groups with iffy not for profit status are upset that laws still applied to them in ways that they hadn't under the Bush Administration. I don't believe the matter will be otherwise resolved while the current administration is in office and moreover, I'm not particularly surprised that executive agencies might have differing methods for enforcing their mandate from one executive to another, especially given the free pass given to some groups under a previous administration.
Actually, if you were of voting age during the 1992 Presidential elections, you might remember that Bill Clinton was open that he would be working very closely with his wife on the matter. That might have been overshadowed by the spectacle of Ross Perot being a general-purpose sideshow, but it definitely did come up at campaign events and the like.
With regard to scandal or the lack thereof, the closest thing the Obama administration in general has had to one is probably the standard of care for veterans and specifically at Walter Reed. Benghazi has just been an ongoing conservative circle jerk and the Snowden disclosures have really just highlighted the overreach available LEGALLY to the administration.
You might say that the State Department under Obama has allowed relations with Israel to sour in favor of greater ties to other states in the region, but it might also be said that Israel is a big-boy country now that doesn't need the USA to enforce its will. Putin's expansionist aims been an ongoing issue since before Obama took office and the case can certainly be made that the US did not need to intervene on the ground in Iran, Libya or Syria in spite of whatever amount of sabre-rattling conservatives have wanted to do to the contrary.
Bearing that in mind, where do you see scandal in the Obama administration or more specifically in its foreign policy?