Only when someone leaks them.

Use a totally separate browser context for each different place you want to carry out secure, JavaScript-based, web activities. Although there are other ways (need a little coding), the simplest way to do this is just create multiple users (on your own computer), each designated for visiting the places you need security (one for each bank account, one for each retailer, one for access to work related stuff, etc). Browsers do have special features to do this kind of thing, but I have found they are not as separately isolated as I would like. I'm not so paranoid (yet) to use separate virtual machines, but others might. Three letter agencies are known to use physically separate machines.

Yes and no. A private individual can in some places petition a Grand Jury to bring an indictment, without the prosecutor being involved, or even knowing about it.

A "Jury of your Peers"? Hardly. More like a "Jury of your Pees".

If the NSA would just open up their computers, then information would finally be truly free.

Nah. Not really. It's typical gaff from Anonymous Coward. We're used to it by now. Move along.

... until today. So are they gonna ride on the Slashdot Effect fame, now?

These systems get their tech support and vendor updates via ... the internet (and most likely not encrypted). Oh, I agree. The air gap needs to be mandated.

Based on many engineers I know, the job is NEVER finished. They can always keep improving it. So apparently what you see is a kind of "product snapshot" in progress, because management wants to deliver something NOW, instead of wait 10 years for it to be nearly perfect for what the market wants THIS year.

The "free market" just means the corporations are "free" to do whatever the hell they want to. Usually, we expect them to be driven to maximize profit. That happens when the executives are smart enough to achieve it. In reality, they are often smart enough to get fairly close to what their maximum profit could be. But this does not include YOU. If you are going to refuse to buy their next $200 phone, they are not going to give a damn about retro-fixing the current phone, which would cost them millions to code it, test it, and deploy it, just to be sure they get your business the next time. Now if enough of you can make them believe they would lose more than it costs, that can get their attention. Go for that. if you want things to not be this way, then join me in promoting the concept of a "fair market", which places more regulations on big corporations so they realize a loss in the form of fines for doing things wrong.

Agreed. Backpacks provide little protection against pressure cooker explosions. Putting a pressure cooker in a backpack will do little to block the explosion. People really need to know this for their own safety.

This was my first thought. Now I can imagine the CEO might not know. Those guys have their heads in a little world of P&L spreadsheets and don't really have a clue about the real world. At least someone in IT should, however, know about the things that can effect their network. So maybe the head of IT is ignorant about the internet, but at least someone who works for him really ought to know.

I agree that all the resources at the office belong to the business, aside from what few you personally bring in. But it is also traditionally acceptable to use certain things in the office when on your own time, such as breaks. For example, the big table in the office kitchen area can be used for eating your lunch, after heating it in the company owned microwave oven. But, while on your break, and choosing to sit in your office where you can be contacted on the company office phone system in case of any problems with the company IT systems, you choose to browse the news web sites, or place an order on a retail web site, or read the email from your significant other about the need for more milk ... is that OK? Is it considered OK by workers? Is it considered OK by employers? What would you do if you boss never mentioned one way or the other if it were allowed? What would you do if lots of other workers were doing it and the boss knew about it and did nothing?

Well, at least it fits the now running obligatory car analogy.

This so often depends on what the task is. If management chooses to let you decide how to go from problem to solution, this kind of thing can happen for a lot of people. If management is already dictating specifics of the solution, then it is most likely to end up as a disaster (except people with the special unique skill of knowing how to deal with idiot managers).