backtop


Print 85 comment(s) - last by vol7ron.. on Dec 11 at 11:28 PM

Pickup should boost Apple's recently struggling security efforts

Malware authors, who are finally taking note of the company’s operating system amid rising market share, have of late victimized Apple, Inc. (AAPL).  Amid struggles with malware -- mostly Trojans (programs that imitate real software or are carried by seemingly innocent webpages and trick users into installation) like MacDefender and Flashback -- the company has been scrutinized by security firms who suggest it needs help, and a more proactive stance on plug-in patching.

The highly profitable computer and digital device maker made a key step in the right direction this week, though, hiring Kristin Paget (formerly Chris Paget), according to a report by Wired.

Ms. Paget seems a natural fit for Apple.

She has said in past interviews that she is a "total Unix head" (OS X is Unix-like) and dislikes Windows.  And she's expressed an interest in hardware security.  When she left Recursion Ventures, her security firm, in July she expressed a desire to move away from bug-finding.  

Thus she may see her talents first applied to Apple's efforts to lock firmware hackers like George "GeoHot" Hotz out of Apple's iOS firmware.  Since the launch of the iPhone, Apple has been largely unable to stop such hackers from defeating its digital rights management scheme (via jailbreaking) and its network locking (via unlocking).  Apple has hired hackers in the past (most notably "Comex") to try to shore up its firmware, but the efforts have oft fizzled.

The new recruit, though, could fare better as she brings a long history of eye-opening security exploits.  In 2010 at DefCon hacker conference she set up a cell-phone intercepting station, a low-cost homebrew hardware setup that tricked towers into routing calls -- even encrypted ones -- through it, allowing conversations to be snooped on.

Kristin Paget
Kristin (formerly Chris) Paget led the bug finding hunt that helped dramatically improve the security of Windows Vista. [Image Source: Jean-Philippe Martin]

But Ms. Paget's most prestigious honor was delaying Windows Vista and in the process greatly improving its security.  In 2006 she was hired by Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) to assist with the final development of Vista.  According to recent speeches, which she gave after her five-year non-disclosure agreement (NDA) with Microsoft expired in 2011; Microsoft had expected a clean bill of health when they brought her onboard.

Instead, she and her team found a wealth of bugs.  She recalls, "We prevented a lot of bugs from shipping on Vista.  I’m proud of the number of bugs we found and helped get fixed."

The bug hunt was so successful that it forced Microsoft to delay Windows Vista.  Ms. Paget and her team received honorary shirts from Microsoft Vice President of Windows Development Brian Valentine that read: “I delayed Windows Vista.”

Windows Vista is widely viewed as a turning point in Microsoft's security history, paving ground for later 

Source: Wired



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

well
By kleinma on 12/7/2012 1:43:04 PM , Rating: 5
Thats a man baby, yeah!




RE: well
By headbox on 12/7/2012 1:44:31 PM , Rating: 1
half the guys reading this have slept with less feminine women


RE: well
By othercents on 12/7/2012 1:58:34 PM , Rating: 2
Was a man per his/her blog.


RE: well
By xthetenth on 12/7/12, Rating: -1
RE: well
By 91TTZ on 12/7/2012 6:48:14 PM , Rating: 5
Just because this person found a doctor who agreed that a sex change operation is legit doesn't mean that everyone else must also feel that way.

It's as if I told you that I was a plant or a dolphin... I might believe that but I wouldn't expect everyone else to go along with my little fantasy.

Now, before you think that I have something against this person I want to point out that I have no problems with them and my argument is one of logic.

If I were to approach you and tell you that God rules over Mankind and the universe, I'm sure that you could respect my beliefs. But if I then told you that you must believe this also, well that crosses a line. I can respect the fact that someone may have different beliefs than me but they're imposing on me if they expect me to believe it as well.


RE: well
By Cloudie on 12/7/2012 11:23:46 PM , Rating: 1
So you reject her identity. But why? How is that logical? How is it useful? Is it making the world a better place? A happier place? A more productive place?

No, it's just putting people down.


RE: well
By vol7ron on 12/8/2012 1:29:03 AM , Rating: 3
Identity? Or preference?

The person went most of their life portraying one thing and then flips it and expects you to then go along with how they "re-identify" themselves. So if they switch it back, you're again supposed to change your actions so that you don't offend them? - I would find that offensive.

I will say that I know someone that has underwent the surgery. While I don't agree with it, I did respect their decision and went along with what they preferred because it was just that... a matter of respect. If I had no respect for that person, I would probably not be as likely to succumb to what they preferred.

And just so you know, 91TTZ did not say he rejected it, but instead said he does not like to be forced to identify someone as something. A person can change his/her appearance, but them doing so should not force you to change your thoughts. Your thoughts are your own property and while reasoning may cause you to change your opinion, one person's thoughts or actions should not reign over your own, certainly not to compromise your freewill, unless it would otherwise cause unreasonable harm.


RE: well
By Cloudie on 12/9/2012 4:09:30 AM , Rating: 2
Brain scans have shown that trans people do indeed have the brains of the opposite sex to themselves which is why they feel the way they do and why they feel the need to go through such a dramatic process.

There is no evidence that any human being has ever been born with the brain of a dolphin and since plants don't have brains...

At the end of the day, there is nothing to disagree with. I don't get why you turn this into something about you.


RE: well
By Totally on 12/9/2012 7:00:00 PM , Rating: 1
Exactly how? When the differences between male/female are still being established? Other than a few physical differences nothing much is really fact.


RE: well
By LRonaldHubbs on 12/10/2012 5:56:21 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
Brain scans have shown that trans people do indeed have the brains of the opposite sex to themselves which is why they feel the way they do and why they feel the need to go through such a dramatic process.

Please cite your source for this statement.


RE: well
By Just Tom on 12/10/2012 12:03:35 PM , Rating: 2
RE: well
By Totally on 12/10/2012 2:29:18 PM , Rating: 2
If that's the source then:

quote:
Brain scans have shown that trans people do indeed have the brains of the opposite sex to themselves which is why they feel the way they do and why they feel the need to go through such a dramatic process.
]

Is complete BS, as the article explicitly states transgender brains are in an in-between state.


RE: well
By superstition on 12/10/2012 2:43:47 PM , Rating: 2
What's your point, then?

Surely, it isn't that a transgendered person's brain is the same as a member of the biological sex that person appears to be?

Brain scans can only show so much. There are limitations to every one of the technologies. You know, you can do something really crazy and rely on the feelings of the individual instead of the reports of machines.

Crazy idea, I know.


RE: well
By Cloudie on 12/11/2012 2:40:57 AM , Rating: 2
I agree with you. I am tired of this patronising nonsense that trans people are "deluded". She isn't deluded, you need to broaden your understanding.


RE: well
By LRonaldHubbs on 12/11/2012 5:49:19 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
the article explicitly states transgender brains are in an in-between state

This. The reason I asked for a source was because the idea of a person developing with the body of one sex and the brain of another just sounded way too simple to be true. The cited article reveals that the truth is more complicated than that.

I do understand the point Cloudie was trying to make though, which is that there is a biological explanation for gender identity issues and it is not simply a choice.


RE: well
By LRonaldHubbs on 12/11/2012 5:43:46 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
google is your friend

Thanks for the link. Google would have been my friend had I not been at work.


RE: well
By TSS on 12/10/2012 2:17:37 AM , Rating: 2
People aren't forced to change their beliefs no. But at the same time, it does make them ignorant assholes. And that's just fact.

So are you by the way, suggesting "if they switch back". Right. Like they keep the penis on cold ice "and if you want it back we'll sow it right back on!".

Meanwhile, they went most of their life portraying themselves as something else because society expects that from them. Go ahead, go to your friends/family/anybody you know, tell them you're a woman trapped in a man's body and are terribly unhappy because of it. See how they react. Hint: don't expect them to be understanding.

This aint about beliefs. It's about their unhappyness and fixing it. And to be honest, if i'd had to chose between the happyness of this person or the happyness of some closeminded asshole, i'll vote this person any day.


RE: well
By vol7ron on 12/10/2012 2:42:25 AM , Rating: 2
You're right, this isn't about beliefs - it is about happiness.

Just because you have a "sex change", doesn't mean you change your gender. Being born a man and chopping off your genitalia and pumping yourself full of estrogen/hormones does not make you a woman, it just makes you a mutilated man. That is regardless of of society accepting your decision. So who really is the ignorant asshole? The person that expects others around him to change, or the people that recognize a fence is a fence, no matter how you paint it.

Back to gender benders, the issue is not that someone does so, the issue is that someone feels they need to do so. It is an imbalance of the psyche, which is not easy to heal. Psychological problems can affect the physical body and that is what many people that condemn others for being close-minded, either seem to forget, or are themselves close-minded about.

As stated, for me it's a matter of respect. I certainly believe a person has the right do it, but my reaction to it is all contingent on my take of the situation. And so you know, there are a lot of people that have had the operation that have wanted to switch back, just like there are self-proclaimed "homosexuals" that go back to being heterosexuals. It's the reason why there are thorough exams and stages to the operation, to try to make sure a person really knows its difficult to reverse.


RE: well
By Cloudie on 12/11/2012 2:39:16 AM , Rating: 2
'there are a lot of people that have had the operation that have wanted to switch back'

I'm not interested in 'how many', I'm interested in a percentage. What percent of people who have the operation want to switch back? I bet it's sub 1%.

'just like there are self-proclaimed "homosexuals" that go back to being heterosexuals.'

There was an American woman a few months back who said her sexuality just "changed". She was married to a man but broke up and got a divorce. Then a few years later she fell in love with and married a woman. A week later she admitted she was actually bisexual.

Sorry but there are two types of people saying this: 1) bisexuals 2) people hired by religious nutters to say they were "gay" then say they were straight and that they'd be cured by wacko therapy. It suits certain social conservative groups to portray homosexuality as a choice.

I admit there is fluidity to human sexuality, especially in teenage years but not that much.

And again I want a percentage on that. This time I would say sub 0.01%. Sexuality is not a choice and it cannot be "cured" however much some poor soul may wish it could.


RE: well
By vol7ron on 12/11/2012 11:28:55 PM , Rating: 2
If you're interested in percentage, then you don't understand numbers. Since the number of people that undergo the operation is probably a really small figure, there doesn't need to be a lot to make it a higher percentage.

And, I'm sorry but you can't group all people that claim to have a change in preference as either bi-sexual or crazy; surely, you have to believe there are people not in either of those two categories.

Whether the person has homosexual attraction is one thing, acting on it is another thing entirely. I'm not going to defend whatever a religion's stance is on the matter, just like I'm not going to try to defend my gay friends' views; however, I like to think the religious argument is that wanting to do something and doing something are two different things.--

There are kleptomaniacs that want to steal, some may say that's a genetic tendency, others say it's psychological, triggered by some event in the person's past (sounds just like the argument over homosexuality), but it is agreed that acting on it (actually stealing something) is against religious principles, no matter how much the person was "born" with that desire. The same argument is made for murder, drugs, adultery, etc. -- We all have our demons and from an objective standpoint, it's interesting to see how we view our faults, where we place blame, and what arguments are made.

______________________________

Back to your numbers; you're never going to get the ones you want. They can't even get polls for presidential elections correct. The ability to get an overwhelming number of people to honestly comment on something so personal as sexuality (especially at a young age), doesn't seem feasible at the point.

But whatever the point, I'm an advocate of personal freedom. If what you do doesn't negatively affect a large majority of others and/or those immediately around you, then have fun doing it and enjoy your life, just don't force your beliefs onto others - and that's for all forms of music, drugs, sex, religion, etc.


RE: well
By 91TTZ on 12/11/2012 2:37:37 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
People aren't forced to change their beliefs no. But at the same time, it does make them ignorant assholes. And that's just fact.


No, that would be an opinion. Some people would disagree, some people would agree, it's all subjective.


RE: well
By tim851 on 12/8/12, Rating: 0
RE: well
By L0U on 12/8/2012 2:21:53 PM , Rating: 5
What's your big problem? He's a hacker. Hackers love modding. In the end, he modded himself, and then he was a she, and says, Hey babe, ...


RE: well
By superstition on 12/10/2012 2:10:03 PM , Rating: 2
You're so clever, you should write a book.


RE: well
By makius on 12/10/2012 8:35:22 PM , Rating: 2
Listen to the first song, "Same Love"... you're welcome.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JrEJmvuKSwo&list=P...


RE: well
By FITCamaro on 12/7/2012 2:33:11 PM , Rating: 3
Speak for yourself. I'll take a pretty face over a perfect body any day.


RE: well
By Kurz on 12/7/2012 3:25:48 PM , Rating: 4
Well... Depends on the package man. I know this girl with 9 body and a 3-4 face. I cant resist man.


RE: well
By kleinma on 12/7/2012 6:47:57 PM , Rating: 5
I don't know about you, but I like to stay away from any woman that has a package ;)


RE: well
By Kurz on 12/8/2012 8:53:39 AM , Rating: 3
Well those trannies do a damn good job hiding them. Plenty of men have been fooled. ;)


RE: well
By Lord 666 on 12/7/2012 4:06:37 PM , Rating: 2
RE: well
By spread on 12/8/2012 12:03:03 AM , Rating: 2
That's a man's face baby yYeah!


RE: well
By Helbore on 12/10/2012 10:42:37 AM , Rating: 2
And the other half have never slept with a woman, period.

This is a tech site, after all ;)


RE: well
By OoklaTheMok on 12/7/12, Rating: -1
RE: well
By Camikazi on 12/7/2012 5:51:03 PM , Rating: 3
It's a quote from a movie...


RE: well
By kleinma on 12/7/2012 6:47:18 PM , Rating: 3
Thank you for actually getting my reference ;)


RE: well
By OoklaTheMok on 12/8/12, Rating: -1
RE: well
By Totally on 12/8/2012 2:59:33 PM , Rating: 2
Where in your previous response it that ever implied?

With the quote, he just stated the obvious, it's a man in that picture, follow your own advice.


RE: well
By xti on 12/8/2012 3:10:03 PM , Rating: 2
well you should have not posted and we would all have been safe of stupidity!


RE: well
By superstition on 12/10/2012 2:11:46 PM , Rating: 2
Perhaps, but I'm sure someone else would have wasted everyone's time with childish finger pointing mockery.


RE: well
By xthetenth on 12/7/12, Rating: 0
RE: well
By superstition on 12/10/2012 2:08:52 PM , Rating: 2
That's juvenile spam, yeah!


RE: well
By NellyFromMA on 12/10/2012 7:18:11 PM , Rating: 2
I venture to guess you're a prize yourself. What kind of man dogs a woman on a tech site? Oh that's right, none. Try again when you become an adult. What a loser.


RE: well
By NellyFromMA on 12/10/2012 7:23:18 PM , Rating: 2
Oh crap, she actually is/was a legit man. MY bad man, I like to live in a world where I can assume a picture of a not-great looking woman is, well, actually a woman... like 100% woman.


RE: well
By superstition on 12/11/2012 3:01:31 PM , Rating: 2
You were right the first time, and my opinion of your character rose significantly. I can see my original appraisal, however, was more accurate, unfortunately.

I'm glad you get to decide who is real and who isn't. That must make you very special indeed.


OS X is not secure?
By faust_67 on 12/7/2012 2:45:58 PM , Rating: 3
Apple always claimed that OS X is impervious to viruses, troyans, etc.. Were they lying?




RE: OS X is not secure?
By DukeN on 12/7/2012 2:53:47 PM , Rating: 2
No, they have a patent to back that up (probably..)


RE: OS X is not secure?
By Gondor on 12/7/2012 4:40:45 PM , Rating: 2
Speaking of which, it's nice to see yet another bull$hit patent of theirs invalidated. I expect Mick's story any moment now ;-)


RE: OS X is not secure?
By spread on 12/8/2012 12:04:54 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
another bull$hit patent


Excuse me. Excuse me. Do you know how much work Apple puts into finding proper patents to steal? And then stealing them? Probably more work than the original inventors of said patents put into making them.


RE: OS X is not secure?
By arazok on 12/10/2012 9:00:37 AM , Rating: 2
The patent is a drawing of an apple beside a skull and crossbones with an X throug it. Anyone who makes a virus is infringing on it.


RE: OS X is not secure?
By Tony Swash on 12/7/12, Rating: -1
RE: OS X is not secure?
By momorere on 12/7/2012 3:18:16 PM , Rating: 3
Saving the day on another article ah ? What do you really expect when crApple only has 8.54% of the desktop marketshare ? That is like robbing a house that you know is poor, in other words, nothing to gain. Hurry and say how such a small percentage generates so much more profits than all of the top 10 competitors combined as per your usual post.


RE: OS X is not secure?
By Tony Swash on 12/7/12, Rating: -1
RE: OS X is not secure?
By 91TTZ on 12/7/2012 7:05:46 PM , Rating: 3
Apparently Apple's leadership doesn't agree with you which is why they're spending the money to hire people specializing in the subject.


RE: OS X is not secure?
By Tony Swash on 12/8/12, Rating: -1
RE: OS X is not secure?
By momorere on 12/8/2012 11:57:06 AM , Rating: 2
Still trying to pass opinions as "facts" huh ? Haven't you figured out that isn't the case ? I can just as easily point to some random person's blog/site and state that it is 100% fact/legit. I'm thinking about creating a site with "facts" to link to you on all your posts and you HAVE to believe everything they say as it is per your usual tatics along with crApple's financial stats. I fully understand that all your efforts are part of your position as a PR rep at crApple but you take it to heart.

P.S. It's REALLY nice to see crApple getting closer and closer to that mystical $1,000 stock price. LOLZ !!!


RE: OS X is not secure?
By faust_67 on 12/9/2012 10:24:25 PM , Rating: 2
Windows is irrelevant? With more than 80% of the market? If Windows is irrelevant, how do you qualify OS X with it 8-9% share? Not that it matters to me. I use Linux. By the way, never had a virus on Linux. More secure that OS X. How do you explain that (of course other than telling me that Linux has a small market since it seems to you it doesn't explain less malware). OS X and Windows fans make me laugh. Any system, even Linux, is not 100% secure once put on a network or when it receives data from an external source (CD, USB key, external drive). The hard time I have with Apple is that they spread this myth that OS X (or iOS) is impervious to malware and fanboys relayed the word without thinking one minute how stupid it was (not only fanboys, but supposedly informed journalists who obviously have no clue). That's why I love the Linux community. Most Linux users have sometimes to scratch their heads to install something (even if with modern distributions you don't have to anymore, which is sad). Users of other operating systems laugh at that, but I am laughing at them because they learn NOTHING. And after that they just claim stuff without having the slightest idea of what they saying. Most of these people have no clue what preemptive multitasking or multithreading are. They want to be spoon fed and like robots repeat PR crap from companies. Who do you believe the most when researching about the reliability of a car? The mechanic or the salesman? It seems we hear more from the salesmen.


RE: OS X is not secure?
By Lugaidster on 12/10/2012 10:05:05 AM , Rating: 3
Hahahaha, it cracks me up when Linux fanboys spout crap like this:

quote:
Most Linux users have sometimes to scratch their heads to install something (even if with modern distributions you don't have to anymore, which is sad). Users of other operating systems laugh at that, but I am laughing at them because they learn NOTHING.


I think you ought to get your priorities straight. Time is finite and learning to install a stupid program every single time gets old pretty fast.

I welcome the work companies like Ubuntu are doing. Alas, guys like you make me think they are wasting their effort. In the end, if your community would rather have an obfuscated OS to keep it exclusive than welcoming all kinds of user into an open ecosystem we wouldn't have the issues we have with closed environments being so ubiquitous these days.

Disclaimer: I'm a software developer and a frustrated Linux user. I got to tired of having to crawl the corners of the web to get my hardware to work properly or having to fiddle with it to behave (Optimus comes to mind).


RE: OS X is not secure?
By Cheesew1z69 on 12/10/2012 10:05:39 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Windows is irrelevant? With more than 80% of the market?
That's Tony logic...


RE: OS X is not secure?
By faust_67 on 12/7/2012 3:29:35 PM , Rating: 5
Maybe. Bur I remember many fanboys comments stating that OS X was less subject to viruses because it was a superior OS. The reality is far different. OS X was so far less exposed because of its smaller market share. I have been using Linux as my main OS for about 5 years, and so far I had NO viruses. Linux has security holes too, but they are less exploited because of the small market share (one of the advantages of Linux over OS X and Windows is that security holes are patched much faster. Security holes in OS X and Windows remain sometimes unpatched for months). I once read an article about one of these hackers competition in which they tried to hack into a computer the fastest: some hackers refused trying hacking into OS X because it was "too easy". I think that tells a lot.


RE: OS X is not secure?
By superstition on 12/10/2012 2:14:42 PM , Rating: 2
OS X is a more secure design than DOS-based Windows.

When OS X came out, the consumer version of Windows was still DOS-based.

So, yes, they were right.

Plus, nearly all malware, if not all of it, has been via Java. It is a philosophical debate as to whether or not Java should be considered part of the core of OS X or not.

Marketing OS X as being impervious to malware, though, was not a good move for consumers, because no OS is impervious.


RE: OS X is not secure?
By jp23 on 12/7/2012 5:19:28 PM , Rating: 2
No they ween't lying but they are going to change the name to OS Y when she is done.


RE: OS X is not secure?
By xti on 12/11/2012 10:18:02 AM , Rating: 2
if you were a hacker, would you rather affect:

x86/PC users who have 1000 users -or-
MacOS users who have 10 users.

<boomer>Cmon man....!</boomer>


Ms. Paget
By Tupoun on 12/7/2012 3:30:17 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Ms. Paget seems a natural fit for Apple.


... now I finally understaaand!




RE: Ms. Paget
By momorere on 12/7/12, Rating: -1
RE: Ms. Paget
By OoklaTheMok on 12/7/2012 4:53:47 PM , Rating: 2
Seriously?!? Are these readers of DailyTech 12 years old?

It's stupid comments like these that make reading DailyTech an exercise of intellectual futility.


RE: Ms. Paget
By TakinYourPoints on 12/8/2012 1:05:10 AM , Rating: 2
There's a lot more than just this type of comment that makes your typical DT commentor so mind-numbing to read...


RE: Ms. Paget
By messele on 12/8/2012 5:11:42 AM , Rating: 2
Depressing isn't it...

It's the same old people who think its clever to bully those who are not like them, be it matters of gender, sexuality or choice of phone.

People like these are the reason we were denied the genius of Alan Turing at such a young age, and certainly countless others through incessant spite.


RE: Ms. Paget
By superstition on 12/10/2012 2:06:38 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Depressing isn't it... It's the same old people who think its clever to bully those who are not like them, be it matters of gender, sexuality or choice of phone. People like these are the reason we were denied the genius of Alan Turing at such a young age, and certainly countless others through incessant spite.


They're too ignorant to get it.


RE: Ms. Paget
By momorere on 12/8/2012 11:52:18 AM , Rating: 2
Aww sounds like i hurt all the Macolyte's feelings by talking negative about their faux deity. You crApple fanatics are just as bad as the muslims with your gods and doing/saying whatever it takes to defend them at all costs. CEOs of crApple AREN'T gods, hate to break it to you, but they are mortals just like the rest of us. All your love for Timmy doesn't change the fact that he is a flamer.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/27/out-power...

It is weird how the media portrays him as "powerful". I guess we have totally different definitions of powerful.


RE: Ms. Paget
By TakinYourPoints on 12/9/2012 12:27:41 AM , Rating: 2
Nope, has nothing to do with any of that. Nice to see that shameless homophobia is alive and well though.


RE: Ms. Paget
By superstition on 12/11/2012 3:04:40 PM , Rating: 2
Homophobia is the wrong word. That word embeds an excuse, as if it's somehow natural (like fear of heights).

I suppose ignorance is natural, but heterosexism is the real issue. Basically, it's the age-old desire that many people have to feel superior to others. Narcissism.


She was hired?
By 91TTZ on 12/7/2012 6:29:23 PM , Rating: 2
In 2006 she was hired by Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) to assist with the final development of Vista.

This person was male in 2006, so it would be logically and grammatically correct to say "In 2006 he was hired by Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) to assist with the final development of Vista."




RE: She was hired?
By Bonesdad on 12/7/2012 11:00:45 PM , Rating: 2
uh, excuse me sir, your prejudice is showing a little...


RE: She was hired?
By TakinYourPoints on 12/8/2012 1:03:02 AM , Rating: 2
Yup, add "prejudiced" as another adjective to describe your typical DT poster, just look at the distribution of the upvotes and downvotes here.

I'd throw "ignorant" in there as well but that was established eons ago.


RE: She was hired?
By Solandri on 12/8/2012 8:00:02 AM , Rating: 2
Actually, strictly grammatically speaking, he has a point. As written, the sentence seems to be referring to a past event in its entirety, and thus 'he' would be the correct pronoun.

To get this away from gender and the baggage it carries, consider the A-Team intro:
quote:
In 1972 , a crack commando unit was sent to prison by a military court for a crime they didn't commit. These men promptly escaped from a maximum-security stockade to the Los Angeles underground. Today, still wanted by the government, they survive as soldiers of fortune.


quote:
In 1972, a crack commando unit was sent to prison
clearly refers to their status (a crack commando unit) in 1972. If you instead write it as:

quote:
In 1972, soldiers of fortune were sent to prison
it doesn't really make sense. The time reference at the beginning clearly sets up the rest of the sentence as referring to the status quo in 1972, whereas soldiers of fortune is their status in the present.

Now, if it had been written
quote:
These soldiers of fortune had been sent to prison in 1972
then it's clear that the first half of the sentence refers to their status in the present, while the second half describes what happened to them in the past. So "She had been hired by Microsoft in 2006" would be using the correct pronoun.


RE: She was hired?
By tng on 12/10/2012 9:23:44 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Actually, strictly grammatically speaking, he has a point.
Yes he is correct.

This seems to be where people who are PC go off the rails. While I may not agree with everything said in these comments about the person in the article, I do think that they have the right to say it, while some who preach tolerance are only tolerant of people who agree with them.


RE: She was hired?
By TakinYourPoints on 12/10/2012 5:24:04 PM , Rating: 2
They can say whatever they'd like, I have no problem with that. I have no problem calling them out on homophobia or idiocy either.


RE: She was hired?
By Cheesew1z69 on 12/10/2012 10:08:42 AM , Rating: 2
Coming from you, this is funny...


It's a sad state...
By In2Boost on 12/10/2012 1:36:10 PM , Rating: 2
...that this thread immediately turned into a trans discussion versus the topic at hand. Maybe that was Jason's intent?

The one thing this shows, save for the fact a transwoman has accepted a position with a firm that most of us (let's face it) couldn't get a phone interview for, based on her talents and skills, is that there are an awful LOT of respondents that are very misinformed and really do not understand what they're talking about, though their opinions are fervently strong and unshakable.

What's funny is how people write or say, "I have no problem with it, but..." Yeah. Gotta love the "but," even if it's not physically typed in. No one is asking you if you agree with it as it applies to your own person. Unless you're trans yourself, it probably won't! Most of the replies seem to be constructed that way.

What we need to accept, to begin to understand, is that being trans is NOT a choice. Period. It is a M-E-D-I-C-A-L condition, NOT psychological, believe it or not. If you don't - research it, take a class from an accredited institution.

Without getting into an existential discussion of what constitutes gender identity, how many of us have really, really thought about the biology of birth and the modicum of environmental factors affecting the gestation process?

I think once we, as a society, wake up and realize that things aren't always either A or B, we'll be one step closer to having the majority of comments on a board like this be focused on the topic at hand versus the woman subject's identity and past.

Her hiring shows that Apple now has an expert that will hopefully bring in some new ideas to help Apple, and its customers.




RE: It's a sad state...
By superstition on 12/11/2012 3:06:48 PM , Rating: 2
A "trans discussion" is preferable to the 7 year old level mockery.

And, frankly, a lot of 7 year olds are more mature than that.


One more female at DefCon
By WinstonSmith on 12/8/2012 10:01:03 AM , Rating: 2
And they claim women aren't into hacking...




Should have delayed longer
By WinstonSmith on 12/8/2012 10:03:49 AM , Rating: 2
Unfortunately, he didn't delay Vista until Windows 7. Unfortunately, he's not working at Microsoft so he could have delayed Windows 8 until Windows 9.




Adam's Apple
By Any14Tee on 12/8/2012 6:48:20 PM , Rating: 2
There you go, if you want to go to bed with Apple, you need to hack off those testicles.




i have to admit
By jackpro on 12/11/2012 1:56:46 AM , Rating: 2
when I saw this women being hired, I was prejudiced thinking no way, a women, would have the geek brains, to be able to improve osx security. How sad am I!




der
By ginger5010 on 12/10/2012 11:50:13 PM , Rating: 1
Jasmine. I just agree... Adam`s postlng is impossible, on sunday I bought a new Volkswagen Golf GTI from bringing in $5589 this past five weeks and-a little over, 10/k this past month. it's realy the most financially rewarding I have ever had. I began this eight months/ago and pretty much immediately startad earning over $81.. per hour. I use this website, cloud68dotc om




"We shipped it on Saturday. Then on Sunday, we rested." -- Steve Jobs on the iPad launch














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki