<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>friends.praxeme &#187; risks</title>
	<atom:link href="http://friends.praxeme.org/tag/risks/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://friends.praxeme.org</link>
	<description>We love cheesecake...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Dec 2011 18:13:50 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>IT Projects failures and Risk Management</title>
		<link>http://friends.praxeme.org/2010/06/it-projects-failures-and-risk-management/</link>
		<comments>http://friends.praxeme.org/2010/06/it-projects-failures-and-risk-management/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Jun 2010 00:31:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fabien Villard</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[behavior]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[methodology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[project]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[risks]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friends.praxeme.org/?p=516</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Masters of Disaster Here is a very enlightening paper from Wharton&#8217;s Risk Management and Decision Processes Center: http://www.whartonmagazine.com/issues/815.php IT projects fall in the same behavior: Quote: &#8220;a psychological bias toward short-term maximization instead of long-term planning—a psychological bias all humans share&#8221;. IT Project: short ROIs, code before design and architecture, intuition instead of analytical thinking, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://friends.praxeme.org/2010/06/it-projects-failures-and-risk-management/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DNA evidence</title>
		<link>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/08/dna-evidence/</link>
		<comments>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/08/dna-evidence/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 Aug 2009 17:34:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fabien Villard</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Mood]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[identity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[process & BPM]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[risks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[security]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friends.praxeme.org/?p=331</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Often people ask me why I don&#8217;t like the use of DNA and other biological markers as identities. My answer can be expressed in two points: Biometric data cannot be repudiated. If your biometrics are compromised you cannot change them like you can do when your personal certificate (or password) is compromised. Biometric data are [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/08/dna-evidence/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Security is a strategic concern</title>
		<link>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/08/security-is-a-strategic-concern/</link>
		<comments>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/08/security-is-a-strategic-concern/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Aug 2009 20:02:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fabien Villard</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[References]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[architecture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[chaos]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[design]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[methodology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[risks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[security]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friends.praxeme.org/?p=311</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here is an interesting point of view on security business today from an IBM Security Strategist: http://www.networkworld.com/news/2009/081709-8-dirty-secrets-of-the.html Among the eight points some are tightly related to enterprise strategy and enterprise architecture. Points 2, 6 and 7 focus on external concerns, regulations and security product vendors, but  others may be summarized like this: what do I [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/08/security-is-a-strategic-concern/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bruce Schneier on Risk Intuition</title>
		<link>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/08/bruce-schneier-on-risk-intuition/</link>
		<comments>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/08/bruce-schneier-on-risk-intuition/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Aug 2009 16:44:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Fabien Villard</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[References]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[evolutionism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intuition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[risks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[security]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://friends.praxeme.org/?p=308</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here is a very good post of security guru Bruce Schneier on how we as individuals are good at evaluating risks: http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/08/risk_intuition.html. We often hear that people do not follow rules because they do not understand risks and Schneier shows us that the error is to forget that we do not live in a world [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://friends.praxeme.org/2009/08/bruce-schneier-on-risk-intuition/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

