Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<103qd05$15sbl$6@dont-email.me> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: T <T@invalid.invalid> Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.comp.os.windows-10 Subject: Re: Before Dimdows 10 Goes EOL, I'm Testing Linux To Save My Laptop From The Landfill Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2025 20:47:17 -0700 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 30 Message-ID: <103qd05$15sbl$6@dont-email.me> References: <103i58h$3340l$1@dont-email.me> <0001HW.2E0ED9C9000B5EAF70000A26338F@news.supernews.com> <103n7lb$dqtr$5@dont-email.me> <103ohre$38t2$3@dont-email.me> <103ps57$142ke$8@dont-email.me> <103q55q$15sbl$4@dont-email.me> <103qbm8$1ar96$4@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2025 05:47:18 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="cc05401ea67946136c3dd5d2857ebe6d"; logging-data="1241461"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/oTDwtn4GaUVGbNvuo25Sarjno8myK8ow=" User-Agent: Betterbird (Linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:OaLpQxnQWMktgdjoRhJFEEt8PSI= In-Reply-To: <103qbm8$1ar96$4@dont-email.me> Content-Language: en-US On 6/28/25 8:24 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote: > But if it is a legal requirement, then you have to make it work. Or else. True. It is the law in this state. So I have a lot of experience with the problems associated with "keeping things up to date". W10's end of support is actually a blessing in disguise. > Signing off on fulfilling PCI requirements, when the customer hasn’t > actually met those requirements, is the course of action with the dubious > ethics, I would think. I never pencil whip. Several of my customer do. If there is a breach, their grandchildren will need lawyers. I have had one customer who pencil whips, tell me he is not paying that kind of money (to me) to take credit cards. PCI is not about data security, although there are some good security things in it. It is about transferring liability from the card processor to the vendor. By the way, I'd posit that about 95% of the compromises are human related, not technology related