jbeckham

And the largest portion of that is due to specialty drugs.

In the late 90's with dial-up connections, most ISPs would not do this, hence the search for .su proxies. Today, it is much easier when you can spin up a VM in the cloud and control DNS entries.

Back in the late 90's and early 2000's, there were a set of hacking challenges called the Zebulun Challenges hosted by the site CyberArmy. For the 7th or 8th challenge (Lt. Kernel to Kernel), you had to find a proxy or have an rDNS for your IP that resolved to a .su domain in order to proceed into the simulated system you were trying to hack into.

Walk through some IoT stuff using Stringify or ITTT. Let them help you create what is going to happen. Use the development tools on an Android device to change location to show geo-fencing triggers. Every kid there could use the "silence my phone when I get to school" routine, but you can always get more advanced than that.

Maybe I'm cynical, but this looks more like a data hording scheme than a protect my privacy enhancement. If I use Google to sign in, Google and the app has that data and can monetize it.

Now if I sign in using Apple, they are going to have the data to monetize. They may keep the app from getting my information, but that means that their data is better than someone else's data, so it is more valuable. Also, they are getting app usage statistics that I may have opted out of at the OS level, but they now have due to having the sign in history.

Am I the only one that was expecting a site similar to the Darwin Awards?

I actually use this one all the time. I do a little wood working and if I slice open a finger, I just grab my Rockler CA glue, put some on, squeeze the slice shut and wait about a minute.

If you purchase liquid bandage in a drug store, it is just sterile CA glue.

I will actually give more credit to the Executive programs because they require prior work experience (normally 5 years). People are much more likely to remember and be able to use the concepts they have learned in class if they can immediately apply them to real world situations that they have been in.

I disagree. If you are building business software, it is very helpful even as a developer.

To add to that value, if you become a team lead and have management responsibilities or have to manage budgets, it becomes even more helpful.

If you are spending $150K on an MBA, you are spending way too much. In Louisiana, LSU's Executive MBA costs under $60K including all books and meals during the program. If you go Southeastern Louisiana University, their Executive MBA program costs around $20K with the same things included. I went to Southeastern for mine, and I found it very useful in moving into the management chain inside of IT.

Then again, as someone above pointed out, I knew why I was getting an MBA. I can teach myself tech, but some of the business aspects are a pain to teach myself so I paid someone else to teach me those.

Honestly, I didn't read the entire article. By the sixth paragraph, I already identified that the author was blaming the use of a tool for bad product management and software development practices.

All of the problems blamed on "javascript" in this article aren't a problem with javascript itself, but the improper usage of certain frameworks in certain circumstances. Using a big bulky framework for an internal application where you know the user is constrained to machines that can perform well with that stack is fine. Using that same framework on a public web application that will also be hit by mobile applications is not. The problem isn't the framework, it is that the product team did not properly vet the performance impacts of the development team's choice of framework or did not properly specify the performance requirements for the product. One other option would be that the governance structure for ensuring that those requirements are met before release was insufficient. Either way, the problem isn't "javascript", but the SDLC processes used to build the software.

Being that this is a civil suit, he has no right to counsel so anything he said can be used against him. Admitting anything was a dumb if he was planning on defending against a lawsuit.

No I do not. I do know that the Windows Phone version communicated directly with Facebook due to network traces I had done back then. It did not use an intermediary. I could see some devices using an intermediary, especially for under powered and "dumb" phones where they may have made a simplified web app that would be usable on their platforms where as the actual Facebook web app would not have been. Think flip phones that had Facebook integration.

I don't know if that happened or not, but the way this article reads is very misleading and several of the vendors that they listed did not actually have access to the data.

I had a Windows phone that used these API's. When Windows Phone 7 came out, Facebook didn't create the Facebook App for that OS, Microsoft did. It looked like what you expected Facebook to have built and it worked like the Facebook App that other platforms had. The whole purpose of the API agreement with Microsoft was to guarantee that the Facebook App they wrote would still work years down the road. Microsoft did not have access to my data. They were allowed to write an app that allowed ME to access my data.

The NY Times article makes it sound like Microsoft was allowed access to my data. They were not. They were allowed to create an app that had access to an API so I could access my data from the Windows Phone device.