Multicast delegates and events in C#

"lock(this)" is still bad. Please don't lock on this.

Essays: The Eternal Value of Privacy - Schneier on Security

Thank you for stating these ideas in your article, Bruce.

The Eternal Value of Privacy

• Bruce Schneier
• Wired
• May 18, 2006

French translation [#1]
French translation [#2]
German translation
Italian translation
Japanese translation
Portuguese translation
Spanish translation

The most common retort against privacy advocates -- by those in favor of ID checks, cameras, databases, data mining and other wholesale surveillance measures -- is this line: "If you aren't doing anything wrong, what do you have to hide?"

Some clever answers: "If I'm not doing anything wrong, then you have no cause to watch me." "Because the government gets to define what's wrong, and they keep changing the definition." "Because you might do something wrong with my information." My problem with quips like these -- as right as they are -- is that they accept the premise that privacy is about hiding a wrong. It's not. Privacy is an inherent human right, and a requirement for maintaining the human condition with dignity and respect.

Two proverbs say it best: Quis custodiet custodes ipsos? ("Who watches the watchers?") and "Absolute power corrupts absolutely."

Cardinal Richelieu understood the value of surveillance when he famously said, "If one would give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest man, I would find something in them to have him hanged." Watch someone long enough, and you'll find something to arrest -- or just blackmail -- with. Privacy is important because without it, surveillance information will be abused: to peep, to sell to marketers and to spy on political enemies -- whoever they happen to be at the time.

Privacy protects us from abuses by those in power, even if we're doing nothing wrong at the time of surveillance.

We do nothing wrong when we make love or go to the bathroom. We are not deliberately hiding anything when we seek out private places for reflection or conversation. We keep private journals, sing in the privacy of the shower, and write letters to secret lovers and then burn them. Privacy is a basic human need.

A future in which privacy would face constant assault was so alien to the framers of the Constitution that it never occurred to them to call out privacy as an explicit right. Privacy was inherent to the nobility of their being and their cause. Of course being watched in your own home was unreasonable. Watching at all was an act so unseemly as to be inconceivable among gentlemen in their day. You watched convicted criminals, not free citizens. You ruled your own home. It's intrinsic to the concept of liberty.

For if we are observed in all matters, we are constantly under threat of correction, judgment, criticism, even plagiarism of our own uniqueness. We become children, fettered under watchful eyes, constantly fearful that -- either now or in the uncertain future -- patterns we leave behind will be brought back to implicate us, by whatever authority has now become focused upon our once-private and innocent acts. We lose our individuality, because everything we do is observable and recordable.

How many of us have paused during conversation in the past four-and-a-half years, suddenly aware that we might be eavesdropped on? Probably it was a phone conversation, although maybe it was an e-mail or instant-message exchange or a conversation in a public place. Maybe the topic was terrorism, or politics, or Islam. We stop suddenly, momentarily afraid that our words might be taken out of context, then we laugh at our paranoia and go on. But our demeanor has changed, and our words are subtly altered.

This is the loss of freedom we face when our privacy is taken from us. This is life in former East Germany, or life in Saddam Hussein's Iraq. And it's our future as we allow an ever-intrusive eye into our personal, private lives.

Too many wrongly characterize the debate as "security versus privacy." The real choice is liberty versus control. Tyranny, whether it arises under threat of foreign physical attack or under constant domestic authoritative scrutiny, is still tyranny. Liberty requires security without intrusion, security plus privacy. Widespread police surveillance is the very definition of a police state. And that's why we should champion privacy even when we have nothing to hide.

It’s not a Fourth Amendment search if a cop swipes your credit card, court finds | Ars Technica

What a load of ....!

Large AD database? Probably not this large… | Eric Fleischman's WebLog

Large AD database? Probably not this large… | Eric Fleischman's WebLog:



'via Blog this'

SOME THOUGHTS ON THE ORLANDO SHOOTINGS

We are sickened and saddened by the recent shootings in Orlando.  First, the murder of fellow YouTuber, Christina Grimmie, followed by the worst mass shooting in American history. This is a tragic weekend for the people of Orlando, the LGBTQ community, and humanity in general. 

These horrible events spark fiery debate online about gun control, terrorism, and extremist ideology.  These debates are important, but how we debate is also important.  We’re already witnessing hateful verbal attacks between people who feel strongly that they have the explanations and solutions for these tragedies.  When we begin to disrespect and belittle each other, we become more like the perpetrators of the hateful acts themselves.

Unfortunately, these events aren’t simple. They can’t be boiled down to one contributing factor.  But one thing is clear: the vast majority of us want them to STOP.  We hate seeing peoples’ lives ended by cowards.  We hate that families and friends will go on without their loved ones.  We hate that humans are capable of so much destruction.

Most of us want to live to see a time when love conquers hate, when people can live in peace regardless of their race, religion, sexual orientation and identity.  As we seek to find ways to make that a reality, to find solutions to these deeply troubling issues, we must engage with one another with respect and dignity.  Let’s be part of the solution.  We will get through this.  Hate is not going to win.

Rhett & Link

BEST FIX: Error 50 DISM does not support servicing Windows PE with the /online option - Appuals.com

by Kevin Arrows
 January 3, 2016


Deployment Image Servicing and Management (DISM) is used to refresh a Windows image, or prepare an image. It is a command line tool. It has many uses, including its use to repair when System File Checker scan reports errors or corrupted files.

But rarely users have reported getting the following error “Error 50 DISM does not support servicing Windows PE with the /online option. The DISM log file can be found at x:windows\dism\dism.log” when they run the DISM command. Its cause is that the windows seem to think that we are in Win PE (Pre-installation Environment). This is the result of a misplaced registry key. Follow our guide to fix it quickly.

Deleting the Registry key

Hold down Windows key and press R. Type regedit and press Enter. Click Yes if a UAC warning appears.

In the registry editor windows, click on HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE In the left pane to expand it.

Under HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE, click on SYSTEM to expand it. Similarly navigate toHKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control.

Under Control, there will be a folder named MiniNT. Right click on it and click Permissions.

Select your username in the group or usernames list and make sure the check box against Full Control is checked. Then click OK.

Right click on the same MiniNT key, and click Delete. Confirm any message for deletion.

Restart your system and run the command again. Your problem should be gone.

Update BIOS

If the above solution doesn’t work; make sure that you restore bios to it’s default settings. You can do this by booting into BIOS. Since all models are different; it would be best to refer to the manual to see how to restore bios to default.