Maybe im a weirdo and maybe I'll get dowvoted...
But I only feel gratitude to the UI designers and the digital artists that they only think how to make it better for the user both in terms of creating a communication that uses less symbols per word and a more pleasent view for our eyes.
I also learned here that no matter your intentions and how much good you are going to do,and how many people like it, you always find someone not confortable (with his right point of view).
The fact that millions of users and millions of designers choose this style,for a long period of time now, it means that for most of them it make sense.
(Sometimes millions of users are screw up by bad designs, but usually is for a short period and by a handful of developers).
Things that consume energy and don't help life don't have a long life, that's what we learnt in biology.
-The Filevine team was responsive, professional, and took the findings seriously throughout the disclosure process. They acknowledged the severity, worked to remediate the issues, allowed responsible disclosure, and maintained clear communication. This is another great example of how organizations should handle security disclosures.
In the same tenure I think that a professional etical hacker or a curious fellow that is poking around with no harm intent, shouldn't disclose the name of the company that had a security issue if they resolve it professionally.
You can write the same blog post without mentioning that it was Filevine.
If they didn't take care of the incident that's a different story...
This is a very standard part of responsible disclosure. Hacker finds bugs -> discloses them to the vendor -> (hopefully) the vendor communicates with them and remediates -> both sides publish the technical details. It also helps to demonstrate to the rest of the security world which companies will take reports seriously and which ones won’t, which is very useful information to have.
That's not how ethical disclosure works. Both parties should publish and we, the wider tech industry should see this as a good thing both for the hacker and the company that worked with them.
Eh, with something this horrendously egregious I think their customers have a right to know how carelessly their data was handled, regardless of the remediation steps taken after disclosure; that aside, who knows how many other AI SaaS vendors might stumble across this article and realize they've made a similarly boneheaded error, and save both themselves and their customers a huge amount of pain . . .
Almost 4 years here.
Thank you all!
Thanks to the creators of the site.
Thanks to the ones that maintain the site.
Thanks to the ones that moderate the conversations (that do an amazing job).
And special thanks to all those that have the fire of truth and curiosity that keep alive this great community!
One thing I don't understand.
Israel probably have huge amount of data in Google and Amazon.
What is the gain from telling Israel that there is a country that issue an order about some of their data. What data? What's the order about? Etc, many crucial details are missing for Israel be able to do something....
There were two versions of the game originally, one with tax and the other without. The trick is to figure out a way of taxing that offsets the random and unfair aspects of the rules of the economy/game. However, I believe even the taxed version of the game wasn't very successful at it.
-Sagan’s 1995 predictions are now being heralded as prophetic. As Director of Public Radio International’s Science Friday, Charles Bergquist tweeted, “Carl Sagan had either a time machine or a crystal ball.”
Prophetic, time machine, crystal call.
That's exactly the lenguage of darkness and superstition...
They acknowledge the irony in the very next sentence:
"Matt Novak cautions against falling back into superstitious thinking in our praise of Demon Haunted World. After all, he says, “the ‘accuracy’ of predictions is often a Rorschach test” and “some of Sagan’s concerns” in other parts of the book “sound rather quaint.”"
The statement is misusing words, in that rewards make you happy by definition. This is a typical postmodern statement, trying to reorganize deep rooted cognitive structures, with words, which is completely backwards.
It makes a lot more sense than the usual psychology frameworks, so I would rather approach it from an evolutionary psychology point of view than not lol.
I also learned here that no matter your intentions and how much good you are going to do,and how many people like it, you always find someone not confortable (with his right point of view).
The fact that millions of users and millions of designers choose this style,for a long period of time now, it means that for most of them it make sense.
(Sometimes millions of users are screw up by bad designs, but usually is for a short period and by a handful of developers).
Things that consume energy and don't help life don't have a long life, that's what we learnt in biology.