Are you so naive to think that no one in your company could possibly ever do "bad things" regardless of its perfect policies? Also are you so priviledged to forget that not everyone can pick and choose where they work? Sometimes when it comes to putting food on the table you can't sit around and wait find a job with a company that is apprently as angelic and God-like such as yours.

All it takes is a singular action of one higher up, which you have no knowledge or control over, and you think it's okay for you and all of your coworkers to say goodbye to your source of income? How would a regular employee ever have any knowledge of what was happening at that level of the company?

If this is even true, the only ones who would deserve punishment would be the software engineer(s) who created the image and the executive(s) who decided this program should be on the computer. You don't punish innocent people, that does not uphold the spirit of our justice system whatsoever. Yes we have a problem with holding those in large corporations accountable for things like this, but you're trying to solve it by simply causing other problems that are even worse.

More like History 101 epic fail...

It actually makes perfect sense, given the Trojan Horse's meaning. Perhaps you've forgotten what a Trojan Horse actually is given that the name has become so synonymous with malware. A Trojan Horse could mean anything that appears non-threatening to slip behind your security, which in this case is a cell phone, containing malware inside of it.

Bad analogy, since this is leased equipment from Verizon, it's more like you rent an apartment and the landlord changes the busted up locks on your door or performs other various maintenance on their property for you. If you haven't rented before, I can tell you that is quite normal.

"I was able to use all these applications and games on my old Dell, then bought this new Dell and nothing works on it."

I used to work at a consumer electronics retailer and I can tell you that Apples are marketed and sold as Apples, something totally different and separate from a PC. PCs with Linux are sold as PCs...with Linux, which means nothing more to the consumer than a PC with Intel, a PC with 4GB RAM, or a PC with a DVD+/-RW drive. It's still sold as a PC, and that is the problem.

Consumers cannot comprehend what an operating system is, and Linux will never gain traction in the home unless someone steps up to market it as an entirely different product.

It's only justice to those of you who fail to differentiate between the retailer and manufacturer. Amazon took the hit for this, not Sony. It is doubtful that Amazon will be able to get that money back from Sony and even if they do, they will still end up at a loss for the cost of having to get back that lost revenue from the manufacturer.

If you know what you want, and the price is right (and it is sometimes, other times it isn't), why would you not buy something from there?

If you are so smart, what do you even need a knowledgeable salesperson for anyway? The knowledge behind their marketing and salespeople shouldn't make a damn bit of difference to any of us as we do our own research and already know what we are buying.

Just go in and buy your shit, you don't have to make it into some self righteous crusade that exists nowhere but in your own head.

This doesn't really make sense to me as I used to drive cars with no power steering, and at freeway speed the force of resistance on the wheel in a car without power steering really won't be any different than any modern car with power steering. The only time you would really "struggle" with turning with no power steering car would be in a parking lot, you will never struggle with turning anything at freeway speed.

Owners and managers who are responsible for creating and enforcing policy typically act above policy because in most cases, they are. If someone is above you in a position of power to change policy then you really can't expect they are going to follow it to the letter like you expect everyone else to. I'm not saying it's right, or fair, or is the way it should be, but it's reality.

They will never understand the technical aspects of your job, that's what you are there for and why they hire people like you so you can make it all just work. It sounds like they do not wish to follow your policy because it might be inconvenient for them, so it's really up to you to figure out a more convenient solution for them. Otherwise, the best you are going to do is convince them to follow your policies for a few weeks until they forget about it or become apathetic and go back to their normal ways. The trick is finding a solution that works and continues to maintain data security after those few weeks pass and everyone forgets about your presentation on why data security is good.

That is because the large corporation is in fact almost always is more trustworthy than the neighborhood geek. There is absolutely no way for an average joe to distinguish a geek who really knows their stuff from a geek who knows just enough to be dangerous, the latter being the category most of your neighborhood geeks will fall into.

As someone who has worked in end-user computer services for a number of years, it's pretty much a daily occurrence seeing whacked out stuff that the neighborhood geeks try to do, which either makes the problem worse or works around the problem but confuses the customer enough that they still can't use their computer for what they wanted anyway.

Most neighborhood geeks just don't understand that the average person does not use computers like we do and have no desire to learn how to. At least the large corporations making end-user products make a serious attempt at creating something usable for the masses. Some are obviously more successful than others, but in any case the neighborhood geek will typically only be interested in making something usable for themselves.

He did delete it, it even says so in the summary, as well as the article. The FBI did a forensic data recovery of the hard drive to find the deleted file from a year ago. I don't know where you got "forgotten it there" from as that phrase is not even written anywhere in the summary or the article.

The game is free, so nobody bought anything as far as a gameplay or pricing model. The only thing they could have bought into was an in-game item that does a specific thing and still does that same thing as promised today.

I don't see what you would sue them for, changing the prices of some unnecessary in-game items after you agreed in the EULA that they could change things in their game, which they are allowing you to play for free, whenever they wanted? Go ahead and try that.

There is always cost associated with free, because someone has to pay for it, and you can bet whoever is paying for it is benefiting from it in some way.

Now, you may or may not care that someone is benefiting from the collection of your personal data, personally I don't, but to go and say Google is out to improve the quality of life for people and other BS like they are some non-profit charity is just naive.

Credit scores may have value, but the practice mentioned before of paying off your balances on time every month will never lower your score to a point of having any sort of negative impact on your life.

I'm going to call BS on the whole "deadbeat" thing for someone who practices full balance payoffs and isn't late on payments. The credit card companies may not like they aren't getting a profit from you, but that has nothing to do with how safe of a risk you are for other lenders. The credit score is a risk evaluation, not a profit evaluation.

The problem with engaging in a price war with a company like Wal-Mart, is that the only way you can remain profitable by pushing boxes at low margins is to do so at a very high volume. While Wal-mart can push the volume it needs to remain profitable, this is not so for most any other retailer.

A large internet company like Amazon, even though they don't push the volume of Wal-mart, can probably still remain profitable while price matching Wal-mart given Amazon's decreased overhead.

However smaller brick and mortar retailers cannot and should not be engaging in Wal-mart price wars or else they will find their business model to be completely unprofitable. The only way a smaller retailer can hope to stay in business and compete with a company like Wal-mart is in offering what Wal-mart does not offer in services for those products. While most slashdotters probably will never need a service on learning how to use their digital camera or setting up their wireless network, as someone who works in the consumer electronic industry I can tell you that you are in the minority and consumers as whole are looking for these sort of things.

As someone who works on computers under various manufacturer warranty claims, the terms of the warranty for nearly every company state that it only covers defects in materials or worksmanship and they specifically exclude damage due to misuse or abuse. Meaning if I open up a computer and find piles of ash and other foreign matter inside it, you can bet I'm going to deny the warranty claim, I don't care what brand it is.

It would be no different if I opened it up and found moisture corrosion inside because you decided this was going to be your bathroom computer. The manufacturer is liable for the quality of their parts and worksmanship, not for you deliberately placing your product in an environment which is damaging to electronics. I don't even know why this specific incident is making the news because we deny warranty claims for this kind of crap every single day.