This does not actually affect the IPad but rather is an attack to get Windows users to install an "update" for ITunes. The "update" is malware for Windows and is targeted at people who own an IPad and sync it with Windows.

If you have a Cisco ASA 5510 or higher you can purchase the botnet filter for roughly $320 a year. Then enable the filter on your internal interface to block any outbound traffic going to the known botnet IP ranges. I would also recommend blocking unnecessary outbound ports and limiting necessary ports to specific machines (ex. Port 25 mail server only outbound). I would also look at setting up a proxy server such as SQUID proxy. I would do mime filtering on untrusted web traffic and perhaps using dansguardian for prebuilt whitelist/blacklisting. At my workplace I am fortunate enough to be allowed to do a default deny on the entire internet, only white-listing work related sites (of course I work at a bank). Antivirus should be considered a secondary defense in this day and age. You really need to look at getting an IPS device for your network and then perhaps an aggregated log server if you haven't already. These last two recommendations will cost some money. So short term I would focus on outbound firewall filtering and a proxy server.

"and somehow you can't see the difference between '*I* can scoop fetus out of *my* body' and '*you* can't put salt on *my* food.'" You can go somewhere else to eat if you don't like salt. Nobody is forcing you to go there. Who are you to impose regulations on the restaurant owner? You didn't fork up the money to start their business. They have the freedom to choose how they want to make their food and the public has the freedom to choose if they want to eat it. You don't like it? Start your own restaurant and then make your food without salt... See how far that gets you. Probably just about as far as any other liberal fascist idea. Your ideas only work at the expense of others which is why regulations are pushed down our throats. Is there a law against pissing in the wind? No because everyone knows it is fucking stupid. People who run their own business know how to run it best. Others like yourself, impose regulations.

They should then be required to where corporate logos on their suits just like they do in NASCAR...

I see where you are coming from. However, I still look at truth as something that is amoral. One can say science is the pursuit of knowledge. But ultimately the pursuit knowledge is to find out what is true. Take E=mc2 for example, it can be used for good or evil yet we know the science behind it is still true. Science from the 30,000 foot view is the pursuit of truth. Insert whatever synonym you prefer. Whatever you decide to call it, "accurate predictive models" or "truth" somebody will always be unhappy with the results.

I'm not a C.S. Lewis fan by any means. That is why I said "what he believed to be truth". The point I was making is we are all biased. The point of science is the pursuit of truth.

I think the previous post is refering to truth. Which in turn is what Lewis was ultimately refering what he believed to be truth. If I remember correctly science is supposed to be the pursuit of truth. Here is a quote Nitezshe you might find more palatable "I'm not upset that you lied to me, I'm upset that from now on I can't believe you". The real problem is that everyone is biased; the CRU, the russians, your dislike for C.S. Lewis quotes and my 4 weel drive gas guzzling Tahoe. To one degree or another we all look for what will justify our prejudice and disregard everything else. Are all the scientists like that? No. Are all russians? Richard Nixon thought so.

Relax, no more coffee for you. My point is the current administration would never authorize them to be launched. Is that a bad thing? No. Why kill millions of innocent people for the wrong doing of a few. And further on that note my criticism was the lack of being able to make a decision on basic things like deploying more troops or just moving out completely. If you want to only focus on my owl comment which was obviously meant to be over the top then you sir, are a pin head...

I would like to see more funding go into these kind of projects. Something that would actually benefit all of mankind, save the planet and cut energy costs.

I don't really see it mattering much if they work or not. The current administration would never authorize a launch. It is hard enough to get them to make a decision on sending troops much less launching something that might make a spotted owl glow in the dark.