Back in late 2009 and early 2010 I was scraping jail inmate registry records for Scott and Dakota County, MN. This was simply a script which incremented the ID numbers by one several times a day and put them out into a CSV. I uploaded these to Google Docs and had Docs Widgets build simple charts based on those data for a rolling ~6 month window of inmates.
As I started looking deeper into the data I started noticing I had ages lower than 18. Odd I thought but sure enough, Scott County was including their juvenile records in the data mixed with the adults even though it wasn't shown on their public website.
I contacted the County and they fixed the bug (you can read about that here: http://www.lazylightning.org/scott-county-quickly-fixes-juvenile-jail-roster-issue) but I was still surprised at the relative lack of security for juvenile records:
Within mere minutes of my e-mail they were on the phone with me and informed me they closed the hole. After mentioning that the only way someone may have been able to retrieve a juvenile record is if they âoeguessedâ the booking number, I replied that the booking numbers are sequential and thus âoeguessingâ is as simple as incrementing by 1. After our short discussion they asked me to let them know immediately if I noticed anything else with their data and the call was ended.
It's surprising how lax security is anywhere and to the poster elsewhere in this thread that said this is what you get when you outsource to India, this particular web stuff was not performed with outsourced talent so that comment was nothing short of asinine.
You only care about people you know personally?
You must not have kids.
Yeah, I am just anthropocentric like that.
That's one mofo of a planet killer sized asteroid.
Their poor policy and the public's perception of that company. The more people hear about PayPal's poor internal decision making the better off everyone is about avoiding their biggest vulnerabilities.
So probably he turning in his grave with a spin 1/2
... would feel about the fact that his cat became a household name to illustrate quantum weirdness.
After all he created that thought experiment to mock the Copenhagen Interpretation. He was severely unhappy with the latter, and argued against it in his article on the meaning of wave mechanics.
Fair enough.
... whatever the thing really is, comes across as one of the oddest, math challenged inventors imaginable.
Ever so often not being a native English speaker catches up with me, while "constance" is a nice town, it actually isn't an English word. I guess "constancy" would do, and it'll give the none physicist more of a hint towards the meaning, than the technical word "invariance".
Should have made clearer that I referred to the "instant" in the
He who has but four and spends five has no need for a wallet.