Did this guy previously write and direct a Superbowl ad (the "Doritos" link on that page)? And he still had to resort to this kind of trick to get an interview? It's a clever trick, but how many people have something like that on their resume?
Perhaps that ad didn't really run on the Superbowl broadcast but just a concept? Production values are lower in that video than most Superbowl ads.
Slightly editorialized title. Full Text (reference to astrology in item two):
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the House of Representatives of the Eighty-fifth Legislature of the State of South Dakota, the Senate concurring therein, that the South Dakota Legislature urges that instruction in the public schools relating to global warming include the following:
(1) That global warming is a scientific theory rather than a proven fact;
(2) That there are a variety of climatological, meteorological, astrological, thermological, cosmological, and ecological dynamics that can effect world weather phenomena and that the significance and interrelativity of these factors is largely speculative; and
(3) That the debate on global warming has subsumed political and philosophical viewpoints which have complicated and prejudiced the scientific investigation of global warming phenomena; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Legislature urges that all instruction on the theory of global warming be appropriate to the age and academic development of the student and to the prevailing classroom circumstances.
The user string for the browser is whatever browser you happen to be using at the time. In Firefox 3.5.7 I get 93/100 on acid 3 from the internet browser in the app.
It's odd that the address bar in the browser reverts to 127.0.0.1 no matter where you are. Does that happen to anyone else?
Getting the current URL of an embedded frame showing a page on an external domain is (or at least should be) impossible due to restrictions on cross-site scripting. This is the same reason why when you view a page that's trapped in a Diggbar-style frame, if you click a link inside the framed site and later close the "bar", you get redirected back to the initial site. Try it: http://digg.com/u3L7UJ
The message now being "upgrade your damn hardware('s firmware)". Security / stability upgrades are made for a reason. Use them, or possibly suffer the consequences.
Easier said than done. In the ideal network, sure, you'd have extra network hardware to test the update on, to make sure it didn't break your configuration. You might also have failover network equipment so that the network would stay up while you upgraded it in pieces.
Of course even with few resources, you should still strive to make updates, maybe during the middle of the night (hope your customers don't need to access your network until morning), and be prepared to roll back if things don't go according to plan.
That is, if you even knew there was an update. Unlike Windows, your router isn't going to keep popping up little bubbles to tell you to update.
So yes, it is your responsibility as an IT admin to keep the network secure, but there are still a lot of obstacles that means that overloaded admins will forget or procrastinate. I don't know much about the vuln, but it appears to affect telnet. If that was the only thing patched in that update (or I didn't care about the other features that were being patched at the same time), I would just make sure telnet was closed and leave it be.
EDIT: Ok, looked more into the vuln, apparently any open ports make it vulnerable, as it is a problem with how they handled the tcp headers. Only reasonable solution here is to patch.
"That is, if you even knew there was an update. Unlike Windows, your router isn't going to keep popping up little bubbles to tell you to update."
And if your company values its security at all, they should be certain that their IT people are checking for such things. They know the hardware, so they know the websites where exploits / updates are listed. Have a folder of bookmarks, and check it once a week, and you wouldn't be caught off-guard by (relatively) ancient exploits. The alternative is equivalent to a company using the oldest version of XP, expecting there to be no security problems because they aren't looking, and don't want to risk updating to a more secure system. Bring on the viruses / script kiddies!
I'll agree that upgrades can cause troubles, sometimes extreme, but they should be expected at some point in the future. Expecting otherwise is expecting your hardware / software to be eternally flawless, which is ludicrous. Even something as simple as a light switch sometimes needs to be repaired / replaced, and that's just a physical switch, almost literally as simple as it can be. If you continued using a light switch that sparked and smoked every time you switched it for a year, and your house burns down, you really only have yourself to blame. Sure, replacing it means calling in an electrician, or doing it yourself, both of which bring their own dangers, but when the alternative is relatively likely catastrophic failure eventually, it's probably worth it.
