I think you are describing the most successful bands. I wouldn't be surprised if the average band good enough to play a small venue made more money on the shirts than the records and tapes. People weren't choosing them from among all the bands at the record store but from all the experiences in the town that night.
I think the greatest risk to the EU is the sheer volume of communications it allows to travel without end-to-end encryption. Financial, infrastructure, personal political sentiment.. What doesn't a foreign enemy get volumes of minable data on?
A squadron of F-35s is worth more than the Moskva. Russia had to fight hard to regain the title of biggest loser and it could lose that in a single incident. But more than the financial loss the loss of having invested in something stupid is felt when you can't use any of the related blunders as you intended and have to keep them at a distance from the cheap practical warfare.
I find it silly to throw huge amounts of resources away worrying about quantum attacks that won't get burned on something as silly as this week's DNS if it happens to be protected at all. If you are making a 30 year root and/or document signing then worry.
Every company that meets modern regulations runs scanners that identify some attacks against themselves. The scanners sold to them stop there because it is liability to do anything beyond that. You don't have to be a genius to use Telegram instead of Teams you'll simply be fired for taking risks with better tools for the job than organizations and governments want to be acceptable and routine if you are in a Western regulated industry.
Announce a change that is believable and all the corporate software will change to match the utility that is no longer a liability.
Sure though I would view that as a separate problem with the idea of asking anyone to target attackers.. Everyone is an equally good psychic some believe they are better than others.
I don't see why China or most of the EU would want to stop development so I think the only real question is whether countries that protect their fossil fuel mafias end up irrelevant by not keeping up.
This has nothing to do with the reality of computer security. Not getting hacked requires doing everything right and some luck. Hacking requires some luck or doing one thing right.
Silly is not explaining why you can't put your phone to your ear like a polite person who follows etiquette. Polite people naturally won't really just hang up, ones that know etiquette will pretend its more convenient for you to call them back when you can and others will just note you are rude.
Right, and you'll not keep everything out of materials like AI
generated meeting notes for every repeat of every process so
the company doesn't really need many experts in its existing
operations.
I find the mindset of trying to understand and accept bad fine in moderation but as defeatist when taken past the end of the block. It doesn't matter why JS is bad and will harm your future prospects if you approach it with too much acceptance. We always need to be examining the practice in front of us and the theory that would be a better replacement for it and trying
to make the leaps at the right times to keep getting paid while not becoming part of the problem ourselves.
Science advances one funeral at a time applies to software with things going at a faster pace so a good software engineer needs to fake a few funerals or really be senior at 4 years to be dead by 7.
Naturally it is extremely rude. If two people have a conversation in public both pay attention to the surroundings and feedback to change their volume tone and topics. If you put someone on speaker without introducing everyone present then they should hang up on you.