101–110 of 165 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is counterintelligence 101. There are four traditional motivations of insider threats (MICE): M: Money I: Ideology C: Coercion E: Ego The thinking around that is changing, but the financial motivation is still at the top of the list. [1] https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intellig...
Heaven forbid any country vote for an elected official who this could apply to.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I find most of their standard bulk items to be consistently cheaper. Or if not cheaper, of significantly better quality. Toilet paper, for example, is usually cheaper and when it isn't, the quality of what I might find on sale is hit or miss. But the biggest draw is the Kirkland label. I'm almost always pleased with the quality for the price. And it's essentially brand name products in different packaging. You can bu…
The only thing that makes my shy away from Kirkland brand - is their urge to put “Kirkland” label on good wines and expensive single malt scotches. I mean - just keep certain things look as pure as you can, don’t plaster new label on top of everything.
Premium brands have come to the realization, that no matter what, cheaper alternatives will compete. So why not try to capture the lower end of the market as well? A store brand lets you have your cake and eat it too.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you have any reason to have that trust? Absent any evidence, I'm inclined to think that they do very little to protect my data. Had they any stringent controls in place, I feel like their PR or marketing would have communicated some of the specifics publicly.
We definitely have systems in place so that employees can not just randomly look at customer data, and when it is necessary it is always logged. Even if we need to debug customer issues we would need a good reason to look at data over just metadata. There are strict requirements for what can go in logs and dashboards also as you can imagine. > Absent any evidence, I'm inclined to think that they do very little to pro…
But if you say so, anonymous internet user, it must be true. (just kidding, sort of. I appreciate the info. But absent a neutral 3rd party audit, we're all just wishing and hoping.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you have any reason to have that trust? Absent any evidence, I'm inclined to think that they do very little to protect my data. Had they any stringent controls in place, I feel like their PR or marketing would have communicated some of the specifics publicly.
I think there is a widespread understanding that nosing into customer data will get you fired from Google immediately. There was a case the other year that the media picked up so I read about it. As for why they don't usually talk about it might be because (examples): - they don't want people to think about how much data they have - saying: "we punish people who abuse their positions" indirectly hints that this is ha…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think there is a widespread understanding that nosing into customer data will get you fired from Google immediately. There was a case the other year that the media picked up so I read about it. As for why they don't usually talk about it might be because (examples): - they don't want people to think about how much data they have - saying: "we punish people who abuse their positions" indirectly hints that this is ha…
Correction: "getting caught" nosing into other people's data will get you fired. Who knows how stringent the controls are.
I'd be more concerned in Google's case about "legitimate" but still problematic uses of data: disclosure to law enforcement, crazy specific ad targeting, machine learning for military applications, etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is this sarcasm?
Why would it be? Seems reasonable to not let low-level chinese employees access to company secrets given their track record.
In a company approaching a million employees, someone is doing something illegal/unethical every day. At that scale it doesn’t say anything about the culture as you are observing the outer ranges of a distribution.
Megacorp is harvesting organs and murdering people? Who cares just look at it statistically, it's only four people on the harvest team. Statistically speaking Megacorp is the most well behaved of them all!
Stop trying to look at everything through the prism of distributions, it's a bad tool in many scenarios.
> casino cage cashiers don't make minimum wage They actually do. Google it. It's below minimum.
The average Cage Cashier - Casino salary in the United States is $30,943 as of September 01, 2018, but the range typically falls between $25,713 and $39,285.
Source: Salary for Cage Cashier - Casino | Salary.com
> casino cage cashiers don't make minimum wage They actually do. Google it. It's below minimum.
How can it possibly be below minimum?