Knights of Glory and Beer

Serving the online community since 1997

Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
#114603 - 03/03/13 06:55 AM Obvious but worth mentioning  
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,555
Derid Offline
Chief Justice
KGB Supreme Court
Derid  Offline
Chief Justice
KGB Supreme Court

****

Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,555

Obvious is obvious

Govt is about compliance not security. Whether its IT, or anything else.


For who could be free when every other man's humour might domineer over him? - John Locke (2nd Treatise, sect 57)
#114605 - 03/03/13 02:23 PM Re: Obvious but worth mentioning [Re: Derid]  
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,187
Sini Online
KGB Supreme Court Justice
KGB Paladin
Sini  Online
KGB Supreme Court Justice
KGB Paladin
**

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,187
Not that I completely disagree with this, but article is riddled with yellow journalism, lack of understanding, and poor fact checking. PCI for example is payment industry self-regulatory body, and PCI-DSS is rare example of security regulation that went right. Another good example is FIPS, where government stepped in and provided a cryptographic standard.

In a lot of cases compliance is on IT equipment/product vendor to meet mandated procurement/contractual requirements. This process in not always about increased security, but claiming that we would be better off without it entirely is demonstrably wrong. Why? Because vendors know well that security is expensive, and they can get better return on investment from marketing or discounts. Consumers, even IT managers, are often not educated enough to know better.

Stating that IT managers are focusing on compliance is not incorrect, but that has little to do with the government regulation and a lot to do with liability analysis and infeasibility of "complete" protection. Unregulated breaches harder to litigate and will result in lower potential liability than ones that are regulated or covered by some standard so you can be demonstrated to be negligent.

Last edited by sini; 03/03/13 02:51 PM.

#114606 - 03/03/13 03:00 PM Re: Obvious but worth mentioning [Re: Derid]  
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,187
Sini Online
KGB Supreme Court Justice
KGB Paladin
Sini  Online
KGB Supreme Court Justice
KGB Paladin
**

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,187
Again, conservative's view that any government regulation bad is outright wrong. Open market, even with perfectly working contract/litigation system, would not always produce desirable results simply because "perfect information for decision makers" is unrealizable assumption.


#114607 - 03/03/13 03:40 PM Re: Obvious but worth mentioning [Re: Derid]  
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,555
Derid Offline
Chief Justice
KGB Supreme Court
Derid  Offline
Chief Justice
KGB Supreme Court

****

Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,555

If you had stuck with your first reply, and neglected your second you would have actually come across as a reasonably intelligent guy worth having a discussion with.

Maybe someday you will learn that regurgitating a straw man every time someone posts something serves no real purpose other than to induce eye rolling in others.


For who could be free when every other man's humour might domineer over him? - John Locke (2nd Treatise, sect 57)
#114609 - 03/03/13 09:36 PM Re: Obvious but worth mentioning [Re: Derid]  
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,187
Sini Online
KGB Supreme Court Justice
KGB Paladin
Sini  Online
KGB Supreme Court Justice
KGB Paladin
**

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,187
Please, your backpedaling is overly transparent and convinces nobody here.

You posted this article because you thought you found another data point to support your crusade against "bad guberment taking over our lives", but when it turned out that nether you, nor article author knew anything about the topic... embarrassing, I know.


#114610 - 03/03/13 11:17 PM Re: Obvious but worth mentioning [Re: Derid]  
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,555
Derid Offline
Chief Justice
KGB Supreme Court
Derid  Offline
Chief Justice
KGB Supreme Court

****

Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,555
What backpedaling?

Pointing out that you turn the act of posting nonsense into an artform is hardly backpedaling.

As usual the evidence does not support your conclusions, typical state of affairs.

/shrug

I really, really, really suggest you go back to that link I posted before and pick up a copy of Rosetta Stone for English. Perhaps once you learn what the term backpedaling actually means, you can come back and edit your post so as to be less embarrassing for yourself.

Oh, and the fact is that yes the observations contained in that link are symbolic of a very valid data point regarding the actual effects of Big Govt. The fact that some rules at times serve a purpose does not invalidate the concept that going overboard and mismatching rules with punishments is conducive to creating an environment where people become more concerned with meeting the letter of the rules than addressing the underlying issues the rules were supposed to address in the first place.

But I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you know this. Which begs the question as to why after talking something resembling sense, you choose to turn around and make an ass of yourself.. twice.

I have a good idea of what is driving it actually. Though I will save it for now, and see if you feel like digging yourself a little deeper first.


For who could be free when every other man's humour might domineer over him? - John Locke (2nd Treatise, sect 57)
#114614 - 03/04/13 02:53 PM Re: Obvious but worth mentioning [Re: Derid]  
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,187
Sini Online
KGB Supreme Court Justice
KGB Paladin
Sini  Online
KGB Supreme Court Justice
KGB Paladin
**

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,187
If you intend to deny your intentions, at least do not turn around and provide written proof of it in the very same post you try to deny it.

Quote:
The observations contained in that link are symbolic of a very valid data point regarding the actual effects of Big Govt. The fact that people become more concerned with meeting the letter of the rules than addressing the underlying issues the rules were supposed to address in the first place.


#114615 - 03/04/13 02:55 PM Re: Obvious but worth mentioning [Re: Derid]  
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,187
Sini Online
KGB Supreme Court Justice
KGB Paladin
Sini  Online
KGB Supreme Court Justice
KGB Paladin
**

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,187
Originally Posted By: Derid

I really, really, really dur dur dur Rosetta Stone for English. Perhaps dur dur dur!

Oh, and the fact is dur dur dur dur dur Big Govt.

Freedom, Flag, Constitution!


facepalm


#114617 - 03/04/13 04:10 PM Re: Obvious but worth mentioning [Re: Sini]  
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 355
Stubs Offline
KGB High Knight
Stubs  Offline
KGB High Knight
****

Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 355
queens, NY
Originally Posted By: sini
Originally Posted By: Derid

I really, really, really dur dur dur Rosetta Stone for English. Perhaps dur dur dur!

Oh, and the fact is dur dur dur dur dur Big Govt.

Freedom, Flag, Constitution!


facepalm


The fact that you think FREEDOM, FLAG, and CONSTITUTION are something to mock is why we dont trust your kind Sini. You openly show disdain for the 3 most important things we all have in common. As far as I am concerned, anyone who can do that and mean it doesn't deserve to be an American.


STUBS!




#114618 - 03/04/13 06:52 PM Re: Obvious but worth mentioning [Re: Stubs]  
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,187
Sini Online
KGB Supreme Court Justice
KGB Paladin
Sini  Online
KGB Supreme Court Justice
KGB Paladin
**

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,187
Originally Posted By: Stubs

The fact that you think FREEDOM, FLAG, and CONSTITUTION are something to mock is why we dont trust your kind Sini. You openly show disdain for the 3 most important things we all have in common. As far as I am concerned, anyone who can do that and mean it doesn't deserve to be an American.


Recently in other thread we had a discussion about supposed Democratic heretic-burning inquisitions. Well, if above isn't example of attempted heretic-burning, I don't know what is.

To address Stubs "points":

1. So in your world anyone against PATRIOT bill, must be unpatriotic?
2. "Your kind" makes mockery of FREEDOM, FLAG, and CONSTITUTION by abusing these terms. Anyone disagreeing with "your kind" is accused to be against FREEDOM, FLAG, and CONSTITUTION. Just like you were kind to demonstrate with your post.
3. Your clearly don't believe in First Amendment. Your "don't deserve" comments show that CONSTITUTION and you are unfamiliar strangers. Next time you mention Constitution, make sure you remember how you told me that I "doesn't deserve to be an American" for stating my political views.


Page 1 of 2 1 2

Moderated by  Derid 

Page Time: 0.020s Queries: 16 (0.004s) Memory: 3.1358 MB (Peak: 3.2455 MB) Zlib disabled. Server Time: 2018-08-18 16:21:30 UTC