Right - so back to my original question... what *did* he do?
Right - so back to my original question... what *did* he do?
You're right - I'm a devops, so I know a lot about sysadmin, and a bit about dev. I know he *could* do all those things, but I was looking to find out what he did do, and how he covered his tracks (if at all). I doubt most of the site owners would be checking
It my impression that most criminals aren't nearly clever enough. He *could* have written scripts to snaffle the data and delete the logs that showed it happening, but I guess I'm wondering if he did all of that and if in fact, there's a clear trail of evidence on the systems he delivered.
I predominantly agree with you, but we shall see Snowden used as a pawn in the endless chess game between America and Russia. America can pretend he's of interest and ask Russia to stop him leaking more stuff, or stop him making public statements or whatever they like. Russia can pretend to play along, and thus curry some favour. America can stop this "curry supply" at any time by simply pardoning Snowden, and so Russia likes to 'ham him up' a bit here and there to show they've got some power over America.
And thus, we can expect Trump to go blithering in to negotiations and push the Snowden pawn back and forth, just as Russia will move the gas supply piece back and forth, etc etc.
...'tis one of the many reasons the likes of the Bank of England have been developing their own 'e' currency. They'll run the show, so you won't get to do anything unusual, but you'll still get the benefit of 'e' money transfers/payments etc. It seems like an attempt to 'get with it', but really its a way to make you think you're getting something new and good, whilst still maintaining the status-quo.
cucumbanks jokes in 3...2...1...
Anyone know how he got the information out of the sites he'd created? How did he 'install some scripts'? And even then, how did he get the data out?
I realise that if you're hiring someone like this you might not be so-inclined to watch logs and whatnot, but there must be some sort of trail left by his accesses.
In London we have the "Docklands Light Railway", which is entirely autonomous. Every once in a while someone gets on, opens up a control panel of some sort and start operating the train in some way. I've always wondered why - if they're there for safety or security then that's fine, but why do they need to 'help' a train that runs without their help without any problem...?
As for this... I'm left wondering why it's not on rails, given they've had to close a load of roads to make it work.
I just took a look at their 'about' page - I'm still none the wiser what they (were) up to. Advertising and outreach definitely wasn't big on their list of priorities it seems. They probably have more 'mind share' today, because they're closing down than they've ever had before.
Ahh... the old school is "just pull yourself together" psychiatry, eh?
This isn't about having to look at sick stuff - it's about not being given sufficient mental/emotional support for doing so. Being told to take a smoke break works about as well as telling soldiers just to look away when their pals get limbs blown off. All MS had to/has to do is provide sufficiently qualified and useful counseling/psychiatry to the people they hire to look at this stuff (ie. have the facility and give them paid time to use it) and only let them return to work when they're ready to do so.
For espionage to take place you have to use the information you get from listening into a skype call inappropriately (ie. telling someone who can use the information themselves, or otherwise using it yourself). For example, you overhear Verizon and Yahoo setting a price for the takeover deal. You talk to your pal at Google and give them the price, after which Google makes a counter offer for Yahoo. If you hear them setting the price and do nothing with the information, then nothing happens at all (and there are usually procedures where you disclose what you've heard to your legal people to vindicate yourself of any possible issues in the future). The worst you could be done for is evesdropping/privacy invasion or similar. However, given the ToS, you couldn't even be done for that because you're doing it in the course of your duties as defined by your employer (none of which would be true if you somehow did it yourself from your basement).
MS isn't doing anything unique here - they have people and algorithms looking for CP and other illegal material. Anything that looks suspicious gets reviewed by a human and acted upon. All the major providers are doing the same thing in some form or other. If you don't want your stuff spied on, encrypt it, or use a different means to communicate.
Foxit collects a whole different range of 'anonymous' data and sends that to entirely different organisations. In that sense, it fulfills the same role, but is entirely incompatible.
Comments about your geek card aside...
Sonos is a brand of network attached music players. Most of their products are essentially 'wifi speakers', which not only connect to your local wifi (or wired lan), but also communicate with each other when necessary to create stereo pairs or groups which all play the same thing exactly in-sync. They claim to be able to play just about all the audio on the planet, although Amazon Music seems to be a constant problem, as does SoundCloud. That said though, they really do play an awful lot of stuff extremely well.
There are some (reasonable) criticisms of the product line though. They're considered to be expensive (and more expensive than most competing products), and whilst their audio quality is generally considered to be pretty good, it could be better. Products like the 'Amp' (which has no speakers, it needs some wired speakers to be added) is only 50W, whereas pretty much any amp you could even consider being decent quality is more like 200W upwards. Also, the Amp costs more than two "Sonos 1" devices (which are, more or less, single speakers + network attachment), so it's expensive, and not as good as it really should be, given Sonos pitches itself as being somewhat 'premium'.
Technically, Sonos is pretty interesting. To work around people's crappy home wifi, Sonos has it's own mesh network which means that a Sonos device can be out of reliable range of your Wifi, but still play music just fine. The magic sauce that makes it all work is proprietary, and so you can't hack together a Sonos-compatible device on a Raspberry Pi or something. There are some 'hacks' you can do though, like turning off all wireless in devices you've wired to the lan. It's not really documented or talked about, but if you fill a rack with a load of sonos it'll probably crash your wifi (even if wired) until you turn off wifi on the devices. Devices have dual ethernet ports in a sort of hub arrangement, so you can daisychain them together if you need to.
As for John MacFarlane - honestly, I have no idea who he is. From the summary, I'd guess he's a somewhat visionary tech-savvy business guy who started a company from very little and made it into a multinational that at lot of people have heard of (granted, that doesn't appear to be you). I'm guessing his moving on suggests that Sonos's business will change in the coming months, and as is so often the case, that may not be a good thing for those of us with an existing investment.
Yep - OLED = early Plasmas
Back in the day of CRTs, plasmas looked amazing. Every pub got one because they were big, light enough that you didn't need to have reinforcement put into the walls to mount one up high and some of the were ready for the hood.
A few years later, those same plasmas started to look pretty shabby. They had screen burn, they'd cost a lot to run because they were ran very hot and in some cases needed to be regassed.
2017 might be the year of OLED, but that just means 2018-19 will be the year of QLED or whatever refines OLED. We just bought a new TV a year or so ago, so I guess we'll be waiting for OLED/QLED to be commodity before we buy another TV.
Yeah, I saw that too. Samsumg *may* have something twice as good as Tesla do today, but in 5 years time. Tesla *will* have something better than they do today in 5 years time. Tesla's will also have actual usage facts.
I think Samsung either need to do something useful for today, or else start aiming a bit higher. Twice as good as today in 5 years isn't going to be particularly compelling by the time they try to sell it.
...and in fact Google too. Google's search results are still better than anyone else, but they're getting worse because they're too busy pushing their own agenda instead of just doing what people want.
Ironic that possibly the only company who could reasonably compete with Google's search is dying just as Google is making enough space for someone else to make a viable search business.
If you didn't have to work so hard, you'd have more time to be depressed.