How is this any different than "exploiting" data from Facebook, or mailing lists of people who did not check the box next to the words "I don't want my information to be shared with third-parties"?
How does an unsecured Wi-Fi network, emanating signal out into the street, deserve some sort of "expectation of privacy"? You deserve no expectation of privacy if your blinds are pulled-up and your windows are open. Why should Wi-Fi be any different, just because users can't be bothered to learn to protect their assets?
The White House understands the petition and claims to agree. However, they aren't going to do anything about it other than wait for the "legislature" to address the issue.
You might as well petition the corporate owners of the major cell. carriers, as they are probably the only ones who will do anything about this.
If you really want to read some cool things about Hanford, check out the DOE's cleanup page, and the IEER reports about cleaning up the "canyons".
And remember that they built those now-leaking tanks in the 1940's and '50's. There's also some great accident reports about the "accountability" tanks at Sellafield.
Why would Apple intentionally add a backdoor like this to iOS? If their goal was to create a way for LEO/courts/etc. to access locked phones, why wouldn't they make the backdoor function only when the phone is in DFU mode, or make a separate application that can access locked phones, and strictly control access to that application?
For jailbroken iOS devices, some potential solutions would be to replace the default lockscreen with one of the alternatives, and/or install the Cydia tweak that disables Emergency calls.
Does it make sense that an app. with the sole purpose of sharing user-submitted videos would somehow be devoid of any questionable/suggestive content? Isn't it kinda Apple's fault for insisting that apps conform to their age guidelines, when those apps involve user-submitted videos? I mean...who lets their 12- to 17-year-old use an app like Vine? Do they honestly believe nothing bad might come of that?
My biggest concern is regarding the internal software and dosimetry controls. Could there be a fault condition that would result in unintended levels of ionizing radiation? It wouldn't be the first such accident..
I suppose that's sometimes true. However, some people in certain situations might receive unsolicited job offers, without ever even creating a resume or submitting an application, right?
The point I was trying to make is that, I'd encourage young people to follow-up after sending out a resume. It will help you gain 'chops' for future calling/prospecting that may be required. Also, it's professional to follow-up with a phone call after sending an email to someone you've never met or spoken to before.
I get a lot of unsolicited resumes sent my way. Hardly anyone ever calls to follow-up. My thought is, I'm a busy person, and if the person really truly wants to work with me, they won't give up. I want to see persistence.
I bet that Amazon, Google, Facebook and Microsoft all have very well-thought-out recruiting programs. I'd imagine that young college grad's could be hired for a lower salary than older, more seasoned software engineers. Those large companies are probably more flexible with young recruits. Everything in life is a trade-off. Why would those companies "shower" kids fresh out of college with job offers? I'd venture to guess that they are interested in hiring them because it's cheaper than hiring someone else with more experience. Or maybe that's how it is in the software job market. But as I see so many Americans out of work, expecting someone to 'create jobs' for them, I think it's important to highlight what it takes to get a job that you want. I'd consider your example of software engineers being "showered with job offers" as an exception to the rule. Most people have to actively pursue what they want in life. Plus, in 25 years you don't want to be one of those people on TV begging the government to 'create jobs' for you! So my advice is to learn how to get what you want by asking.
I think most recent college graduates have bigger issues than worrying about their 'self-branding'. It takes time, and, usually some experience, to build an identity. Sometimes you just have to 'wing-it' and see where that takes you. I'd bet that most employers wouldn't expect a kid fresh out of college to know his/her 'true calling'.
Here are some things I wish someone would've shared with me...
- If you want to thrive in the professional world, get a fucking haircut and at least look the part.
- If you think that you can send out a bunch of resumes and be flooded with calls about job offers, you are wrong.
- Most of the phrases you've heard in your youth are true. Ex. "The squeaky wheel gets the grease". See the above point. If you get a job (or a check) just by sending a resume (or invoice), consider it an anomaly, and yourself lucky.
- In life, everyone is only concerned about their own well-being. You've got to learn to highlight 'what's in it for them'. See the above point.
- You're on your own, so make your time and actions count!
It's easy to blame the person --- the offender. But when you think about the way society works, often times the most effective solutions to risk are a combination of social campaigns to educate the masses, as well as physical controls or barriers to prevent bad things from happening.
For example: think about speed bumps. Sure, we could just blame any drivers who crash into pedestrians in parking lots, but by adding speed bumps, we are reinforcing what people already know --- that speeding through parking lots can be dangerous.
Same thing with seatbelts --- you know that annoying chime that won't stop until you've buckled your seatbelt? Why do we need that? Why not simply blame any drivers who crash? Because it reminds people to do what they already know they should be doing. It reinforces safe behavior. It helps to reduce a burden on society --- the negative effects of fatal car accidents.
So I have a hard time whenever I hear someone say 'the problem isn't guns, it's the people who use them', because I think that's only part of the solution. Should people be allowed to purchase firearms "same-day" at gun shows? Should people be allowed to purchase and own as many guns and as much ammo. as they please? Is there something wrong with at least discussing possible reforms to make it more difficult for people to buy guns?
There are some interesting things on the Harris site, but seemingly no open source info on such systems they may have.