Security vs. Privacy essays

Security vs. Privacy essays Security verses Privacy: How much do we need to be watched? You walk out of your house, get into your car, and drive down the street towards some unknown destination. However by leaving your house, someone sees you. They keep track of every move you make. This person already knows where you live and what kind of car you drive. When you make a left turn, the person finds out your name because you yell out the window to your friend. You go downtown and drive through the ATM. Guess what? The person following you now has your pin number and knows what bank your money is in. Your next stop is the post office where you go inside to get your mail. Right behind you, watching to see your post office box number, is the same person. They stand just close enough to watch you flip through your mail and to see where every letter came from and to see which letters you put in the out box. Are you feeling a little worried yet? Do you want this person to leave you alone? Do you know this is all legal? Leaving your house or getting on the internet is not secure or private. Internet-Service Providers can keep a record of the sites you visit, every move you make on-line. Web sites use cookies to follow people around the internet. They use them to see what sites people are visiting and to see what people are downloading. Every time you use your credit card on-line you can never be sure if it will be secure or if someone will be able to access it (Cohen 34). I used the example of the post office before for a specific reason. Electronic mail, commonly referred to as e-mail, is equivalent to someones post office box. According to the New York Times, the government may get into our e-mail to read subject lines of sent and received mail. They may do this without having to show probable cause to a judge. The government must only show that the information may have relevance to an ongoing case (Guernsey 1...

Testing Your Perl Installation

Testing Your Perl Installation In order to test our fresh installation of Perl, well need a simple Perl program. The first thing most new programmers learn is how to make the script say Hello World. Lets look at a simple Perl script that does just that. #!/usr/bin/perl print Hello World.\n; The first line is there to tell the computer where the Perl interpreter is located. Perl is an interpreted language, which means that rather than compiling our programs, we use the Perl interpreter to run them. This first line is usually #!/usr/bin/perl or #!/usr/local/bin/perl, but depends on how Perl was installed on your system. The second line tells the Perl interpreter to print the words Hello World. followed by a newline (a carriage return). If our Perl installation is working correctly, then when we run the program, we should see the following output: Hello World. Testing your Perl installation is different depending on the type of system you are using, but well take a look at the two most common situations: Testing Perl on Windows  (ActivePerl)Testing Perl on *nix Systems The first thing youll want to do is make sure youve followed the  ActivePerl Installation tutorial  and installed ActivePerl and the Perl Package Manager on your machine. Next, create a folder on your C: drive to store your scripts in for the sake of the tutorial, well call this folder  perlscripts. Copy the Hello World program into C:\perlscripts\ and make sure the filename is  hello.pl. Getting a Windows Command Prompt Now we need to get to a Windows command prompt. Do this by clicking on the  Start  menu and selecting the item  Run.... This will pop up the run screen that contains the  Open:  line. From here, just type  cmd  into the  Open:  field and press the  Enter  key. This will open (yet another) window which is our Windows command prompt. You should see something like this: Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600] (C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp. C:\Documents and Settings\perlguide\Desktop We need to change to the directory (cd) that contains our Perl scripts by typing in the following command: cd c:\perlscripts That should make our prompt reflect the change in the path like so: C:\perlscripts Now that were in the same directory as the script, we can run it simply by typing its name at the command prompt: hello.pl If Perl is installed and running correctly, it should output the phrase Hello World., and then return you to the Windows command prompt. An alternate method of testing your Perl installation is by running the interpreter itself with the  -v  flag: perl -v If the Perl interpreter is working correctly, this should output quite a bit of information, including the current version of Perl you are running. Testing Your Installation If you are using a school or work Unix / Linux server, chances are Perl is already installed and running when in doubt, just ask your system administrator or technical staff. There are a few ways we can test our installation, but first, you will need to complete two preliminary steps.​ First, you must copy your Hello World program to your home directory. This is usually accomplished via FTP.   Once your script has been copied to your server, you will need to get to a  shell prompt  on the machine, usually via SSH. When you have reached the command prompt, you can change into your  home  directory by typing the following command: cd ~ Once there, testing your Perl installation is very similar to testing on a windows system with one extra step. In order to  execute  the program, you must first tell the operating system that the file is OK to execute. This is done by setting the permissions on the script so that anyone can execute it. You can do this by using the  chmod  command: chmod 755 hello.pl Once youve set the permissions, you can then execute the script by simply typing its name. hello.pl If that doesnt work, you might not have your home directory in your current path. As long as you are in the same directory as the script, you can tell the operating system to run the program (in the current directory) like so: ./hello.pl If Perl is installed and running correctly, it should output the phrase Hello World., and then return you to the Windows command prompt. An alternate method of testing your Perl installation is by running the interpreter itself with the  -v  flag: perl -v If the Perl interpreter is working correctly, this should output quite a bit of information, including the current version of Perl you are running.

Using historical examples account for the differences between Essay - 1

Using historical examples account for the differences between peacekeeping and collective security. compare these concepts to those outlined by Boutros Boutros - Essay Example Indeed, considering the conflict situations which the United Nations has been involved in since the conclusion of World War II, it appears that it has had more failures, and spectacular failures at that, than successes. Rwanda, Bosnia, Somalia and Kosovo are, without doubt, conflicts that will stand out as a testament to the United Nations failures in all of conflict prevention, conflict resolution, peacekeeping and peacemaking. The source of the United Nations’ failure, its apparently persistent inability to fulfil its global peace mission, is the subject of much debate and controversy. Conflict management scholars, such as Clapham (1998) Ross (2000), Richmond (2001), Ghebremeskel (2002), to name but a handful, have identified various reason for the said failures, often presenting contrary explanatory arguments. Clapham (1998), for example, maintains failure to be a natural outcome of flawed peacekeeping, conflict resolution and conflict prevention models, while Ross (2000) maintains it to be a consequence of the UN’s lack of serious resolve. Ghebremeskel (2002), on the other hand, argues that failure is a by-product of the United Nations’ failure to appreciate the difference between peacemaking and collective security on the one hand, and its continued determination to adopt international as opposed to regional peacekeeping and conflict management efforts, on the other. The former United Nations Secretary General Boutros Boutros Ghali, publicly acknowledged the United Nations’ failure at maintaining the peace and preventing conflict. As he argued in Agenda for Peace, this was largely because the peacemaking process was perceived of in either/or terms and not as a continuum which embraced all of conflict prevention, conflict resolution, peacekeeping and post conflict restructuring. The validity of the aforementioned, however, cannot be assessed without

MGM465-0801A-05 Business Strategy - Phase 2 Individual Project Essay

MGM465-0801A-05 Business Strategy - Phase 2 Individual Project - Essay Example Due to non-availability of statistics from authoritative sources, it is not possible to map the progressive fluctuations in purchase activities of new and existing commercial premises. However, there is a progressive rise in the successive years in construction cost for commercial buildings. The number of new commercial buildings constructed from 2005 onwards is not available. However, the construction costs for construction of new private non-residential buildings for 2005 and 2006 were $256,644 million and $295,715 million respectively. The factors responsible for home improvement were preference for larger and more luxurious living spaces, significant number of homeowners opting for remodeling of kitchen and bathrooms, and in many cases new homeowners opting for home improvement within first two years of purchase. The total remodeling expenditure in USA in 2005 amounted to $280 billion of which $188 billion was for Home repairs and improvement. (Financing Guidebook for Energy Efficiency Program Sponsors, December 2007). It is necessary to improve efficiency by shaking up the top-level management. There cannot be tolerance for stagnant and loss-making centers, divisions and departments. Improve efficiency by working out a policy of rewarding good performance. Managers who do not perform must shape up or ship

Romeo and Juliet Movie Analysis Essay Example for Free

Romeo and Juliet Movie Analysis Essay Romeo and Juliet is a beautiful and romantic famous love story known through almost all over the world. Many producers have remade this dramatic story ad producers will get many ideas from this story to help them create their own. There was a movie made in 1996 and in 1968. These two movies are very unique in their own way. Many people like the original 1968 version, but others like the newer 1996 version better. Personally, I believe that the 1968 version was better story wise because it followed the ‘reality’ of the story better. In the 1996 version, they have more of a ‘today’ like scenes with cars, beaches, guns, and helicopters. However, in the 1968 version, it was more†¦ Romeo and Juliet like than the other version. This version had more of an olden day theme that I feel personally fit the story better. They had swords, older clothing, no cars, helicopters or beaches, everything was more in the time era that the famous love story took place. When and after watching this movie there was a lot that stood out to me when thinking about the love story that everyone knows or has at least heard of before. The things that stood out to me were on how well and closely related this movie was to the story I heard and imagined in my mind when I first heard it from my family. Another thing is that because of how the movie was made, really gave off a good intention that this was how the story went, and that many people would be able to think of this version first not only cause of how old this version is, but because of the realizations that the movie had towards the original story. Even though these two movies are about the same story, and have the same concept, there are many different things that contrast between them. In one version of the movie the music gives off a more energetic, suspenseful, action sound; while the other gives off a more mellow, sweet, calming, loving sound. In one version of the movie the characters play fairly different personalities than in the other. For example, in the 1996 version, Mercutio is a wild, crazy, histarical character who will do the weirdest things that draw you to fall in love with him before he dies. However, in the 1968 version, Mercutio is still a wild and histarical character and maybe a little bit crazy but he doesn’t have the effect on you to fall in love with him before he dies. In the 1996 version, Mercutio gives you a almost ‘welcoming’ atmosphere, while the 1968 version, Mercutio doesn’t give you that feeling. Many people will have their opinions on which movie version they liked better, which movie told the better story, which movie had the better plot, but Romeo and Juliet, the original 1968 version not only follows the plot and theme, but also gives you the way many people would’ve imagined it before they saw the new 1996 version. But if you are to see any Romeo and Juliet version first, I’d suggest the 1968 version so that you can understand better how things were back when Romeo and Juliet were star cross lovers, and where the story line fits the love story better for that more original taste.

Representation of the Characteristics of Romanticism Essay example -- R

Romanticism is a philosophical and artistic movement of the eighteenth and nineteenth century that marked a change in the emotional core of literature, philosophy, art, religion, and politics in reaction on the enlightenment. It is a contrast to neo-classicism characterized by the predominance of imagination over reason and formal rules, the love of nature —nature is good; cities are harmful to humans—, the power of individual, an interest in human rights, sentimentality, childhood innocence, the revolutionary spirit and melancholy. Romantic writers reject most of traditional form and themes. According to the Musical Quarterly, probably no two persons may exactly the same conception of what romanticism is. Victor Hugo for instance, defines romanticism has â€Å"liberalism in nature† The Romantic Movement was marked by several authors including William Wordsworth, Alphonse de Lamartine, and John Keats. The following lines are going to introduce these authors by giving a brief background and detailed information about their works in accordance with romanticism characteristics. William Wordsworth, a major English romantic poet, born in 1770 and died in 1850. He writes his poetry as an analysis upon nature. Even though Wordsworth is very much into nature he still keeps his identity as human. He is a great romantic writer because his writings reflect characteristics of the movement. As a poet, he wrote numerous poems and odes—Lyric poems in the form of an address to a particular subject, meant to be sung—. In this part you are going to be introduced to one of his famous odes, Ode: Intimations of Immortality. This poem is long and complicated but shows the Wordsworth connection to nature and how he makes an effort to understand why hu... ...ve the most is Wordsworth for he always pay attention to the details of all that is physical around him Lamartine in The Lake implores time to stop. But we all know time cannot stop flowing; therefore we must enjoy the present while in the presence of our beloved ones. Nature is moral guide and universal mentor ( Wordsworth) For Lamartine, nature was a manifestation of divine grandeur. He believed that contemplating it could stimulate religious faith. Works-cited Bernbaum, Ernest, The English Romantic Poets, New York: The Modern Language association, 1950 â€Å"To Autumn†, The Norton Anthology of World Literature Bloom, Harold, William Wordsworth, New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1985 â€Å"The Musical Quarterly† 84, No.1-94, No.3 (2000-2011): 307 JSTOR. Web 23 April 2012.http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.martinmethodist.edu/stable/738059>

The Kennewick Man is skeleton remains

The Kennewick Man is skeleton remains that date back to over 9,200 years ago.   The remains were found along the Columbia River in Washington State July of 1996 and since that time, eleven years ago, the remains have been in limbo.   The debate rests on who are entitled to the remains and in what context the remains should be handled.   There are three sides fighting for the remains the scientific community, the Mid-Columbian Tribal leaders and the Asatru Folk Assembly.Each have arguments on why they should have control and make decisions on what should happen to the remains.   When looking over the facts in this case one thing stands out that cannot be ignored.   That one this is a very important archeological and historical find and two that this could answer long awaited questions of who we are and where we came from.   Something fundamental to all human beings, but since the find moral and ethical questions have been raised that will define cultural beliefs and religi ous practices that will affect many in the United States.Let’s begin by discussing the Native American fight.   The Wanapum Band, The Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation, The Nez Perce Tribe, The Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation and The Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakima Nation believe the remains are that of their ancient ancestors and want the remains to be reburied.They believe that scientific study conducted or will be conducted makes little of the living tribal members.   On October 4, 2007 the Senate Committee approved a bill for the Native Americans to claim the remains.   At that time it was the third change proposed that would let recognized tribes claim remains even though no clear genetic connections were made.   But on November 1, 2007 Federal legislation gave protection to the opportunity of scientific study of the ancient remains. (http://www.kennewich-man.com).The scientific community of sociologist, anthropolo gist and archeologist believe this find is important to discovering how North America was populated 9,000 years ago.   Their belief is that the Kennewick man is more than likely related to the ancient Jomon.   They are ancestors of the Ainu people of Japan.   This varies from most accepted ancient history books.Doug Owsley, a forensic anthropologist for the Museum of Natural History at the Smithsonian Institute in Washington D.C. has possession of the remains now and is conducing research.   James Chatters was the original scientist that worked on finding and cataloguing much of the remains.   There were eight anthropologists that sued the federal government for the right to study the remains they include six from universities across America and two from the Smithsonian Institute their names are Douglas Owsley, Dennis Stanford, Robison Binnichsen Gentry Steele, C. Loring Brace, George Gill, C. Vance Hanes Jr. and Richard Lantz.   Their argument is that no proof exists th at the skeleton has any relationship to any present tribes in the Mid-Columbia and that the remains are of European descent.Then there is the Asatru Folk Assembly this group is claiming kinship to the remains and believes that these are the remains showing that there was early migration of Europeans to North America thousands of years before the arrival of Christopher Columbus and that the study of these remains will prove this.   A vital key to proving their beliefs they have sided with the scientific community in the battle for scientific study and also assert the importance to everyone in finding out the truth.   This group believes in practicing Germanic and Celtic religious practices that date back several thousand years beginning in Europe.   They assert that their decedents are spread around the globe.   The name of the group comes from the Old Norse language.Even though there has been overwhelming scientific evidence suggesting the lack of traceable kinship to any of the American Indian tribes in modern times, â€Å"the Secretary of Interior determined that a shared group identity did indeed exist with a small number of native groups that currently live in the Kennewick area.† The Secretaries findings rest solely on the geographical context of the find and on oral traditions, while physical anthropological and archeological studies show that there is no biological connection and there are cultural differences between the Kennewick man and modern tribal groups. (http://physanth.org/positions/kennewick.html).After reading all of the material and researching I found several facts that I thought helped me to come to certain conclusions on who is right in this fight and who might be wrong.   At first when I saw the reconstruction of the skull done by forensic anthropologist, I saw a man that did not resemble native North American Indians.   It definitely looked like a man of European decent.   I found it problematic that DNA could not b e obtained because of the Indians belief against such scientific study and that there were laws protecting this belief.   I did learn though that there are some anthropologists that contradict the belief of the skull â€Å"not† being an ancestor of the Indians and found it to be very confusing.I believe that something so important should be studied, but felt that since it was found on government land and there is an agreement that was made between the tribes and government that all remains should be returned to the tribes for burial in their religious beliefs.   Since the beginning of this incident there has been study and research conducted on the remains, which to me should be sufficient data to be produced on what exactly this find means.   So why not make a compromise and return the remains to their lawful owners (the Indians) and let the scientific community keep whatever data they have compiled on the remains?Morally I feel that if after nine or ten years of study and research that no one has come up with any real clear data, then it just won’t happen.   I myself find it offensive that the Smithsonian still has stuffed humans in the basement of their institution and that this clearly shows total lack of consideration for cultures and humans around the globe.   Sometimes mysteries, even 9,000 year old mysteries, can never be solved and we all need to just accept this.Reference:http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/columnist/vergano/206-02-27-kennewick-man_x.htm