Because then you'd also have to block employees bringing their phones to work, and very quickly you wouldn't have any quality employees.

From TFA:

The simple fact is that you need to lock your user account if you want to protect your information. If you don't do that, nothing else really matters because it's all just theater and won't actually stop anyone willing to invest minimal effort.

And there it is. The bottom line. Kember demands that Chrome engage in security theater and the Chrome authors said no. As they should.

Hear hear! Captchas were fine when they started but lately they do this weird wavy thing. I have to hit reload a few times before I get one where I can make out all the letters... and my vision is just fine.

If he's leaving happy, ask him (and your boss) to work out an hourly consulting rate so you can reach out to him for the next few months and he'll be properly compensated for it.

Not selfishness but rather self-interest. Cooperation is often in one's self-interest. There's a reason that "power in numbers" is a truism.

Google never argued in favor of letting folks run servers on residential access connections. That is and always was a harmful distortion of what network neutrality is about. Network neutrality means that if I buy a product with which it's reasonable for me to watch video then I can watch video from the supplier of my choice using the network protocol of my choice without any preference or suppression by you as an ISP.

Had Google said, "You may only run Google product or Google-approved servers," they would be violating network neutrality. They didn't. They said, "No servers on this product. Period."

Another guy caves because some generic dude on the Internet sent him some baseless but threatening letters. I'll play a sad song on my tiny violin.

At least let the guy get sued before reporting it as actual news.

You can find | sort | diff ahead of time (maybe in the background) and then constrain the rsync to only the files recorded to have changed.

Floppy disks go bad pretty quickly. Few of yours disks from 1993 still work. Tough to find any working disks from 1983. Unless there's something inherent to the disk itself (the "original" software with the artwork and sleeve) there's not a whole lot of point in keeping it after securing the data.

And God help you with tapes.

Hard disks have better longevity. If you can find a working PC-AT with a working MFM controller you can probably still boot that 40 meg drive from 1988. But... why? You can fit thousands of those on a modern thumb drive. Physical storage costs money. You can spend it better places than storing obsolete hard drives.

Check out what they do in Hawaii County, Hawaii (the Big Island). They have street lights but must control light pollution for the sake of the telescopes on Mauna Kea.

Watermark the documents for each subscriber. Then, see which ones show up pirated and handle it privately with the few subscribers who were the source.

DRM that tries to prevent piracy through preventative technical measures...

a) doesn't work.
b) pisses off your customers.

BTW, you may as well offer an online copy with the paper subscription. If you don't and your magazine is worth anything, it'll just be scanned and PDFed anyway. Most of your customers want to pay you, but they expect you to deliver the magazine in an unencumbered format that they find convenient.

Have a look at BAEN books. They have a winning formula.

Also, that's not how new major parties form in the US. New parties form when one of the two major parties splits. For example, the Republican party could conceivably split between the Tea Partiers and the Compassionate Conservatives. They're the two major factions in the party and they have little in common.

If such a split were to occur, it would leave the incumbents of both halves in a weak position. Constituents that consider themselves to be part of the other half of the party might not vote for them again. So, one of two things happens:

1. One half of the split party is successful at pirating part of the other major party's base. For example, the social justice democrats are relatively close in belief to the compassionate conservatives. If a Compassionate Conservative party, having calved from the Republican Party, could make a solid call to the social justice voters they could punk the democrats and come out ahead by leaving the tea partiers behind.

It happened before when the Democrats captured the black vote from the Republican Party. Remember, the Republicans are Lincoln's party, the man who freed the slaves. They had the black vote for a long, long time.

2. With a party fractured, someone in the wings that better captures the voters' interest steps up and pulls the rug from under both hales of the fractured party. This becomes the new second party in American politics. This is more or less what happened after the Civil War when the modern Democratic party was born on a Southern Defiance platform.

Occupy was a movement by a few thousand folks with the nominal support of perhaps a few hundred thousand spread out through a country of more than 300 million. Had there been one outstanding charismatic leader, he might have been able to parlay the exposure into local elective office somewhere. There wasn't.

Tea Party is a better example. They weren't getting anywhere as Libertarians so they became a faction of the Republican party instead.