Making thousands of legitimate customers suffer because of the mere possibility of an attack that obscure isn't "security," or even "security theatre." It's just plain malice.
If they implement effective geoblocking, someone will just create an "Uber for foreign Netflix viewers" proxy. At that point it really will become impossible to enforce, because Netflix can't tell what's happening to the data after it reaches a US-based household.
I see it as more like the requirement for GMRS and (previously) CB licenses. You're supposed to have an FCC license before using GMRS, and the application form comes in the box with the walkie-talkie (or at least it used to.) But how many people ever fill out those forms and send them in?
Back when individual CB licenses were required, I'd be amazed if the compliance rate ever hit 1%.
Apparently, according to the longer document (which is an interesting way to kill an hour or two), there was also some kind of conferencing system between the individual launch control centers in each flight. The keys had to be turned at the local consoles, but at least one other control center also had to "vote" to launch, presumably by turning their keys as well.
Later, this was augmented by the addition of a box with some thumbwheel switches that required the entry of a specific code from SAC as a condition for launch.
I haven't found that to be true. In many other countries, often referred to as more "civilized" ones, people argue that the government should have a monopoly on the use of force.
And you know what? That's OK. We Americans will come over and bail you out of your next holocaust, attempted genocide, continent-wide war, or other large-scale human rights atrocity, the same way we've bailed you out of your previous ones. If history is any guide, you'll end up better off than you were before you started all the shit, and at our expense.
A spokesperson for the ACB told me today that publications which contain offensive depictions or descriptions of persons who are or appear to be persons under the age of 18 (whether they are engaged in sexual activity or not) must be classified RC. They said the Board classifies publications on a case by case basis, in accordance with the Guidelines for the Classification of Publications, the Code and the Classification Act and that the Publications Guidelines do not specify breast size.
Rather than "debunking" anything, this quote reflects a situation that's even worse. If the model "appears to be" under 18, that's apparently enough to impose prior restraint. A standard based on bra size could at least be enforced objectively, but how do you appeal a decision of an unelected, unaccountable censorship board on no grounds other than "She looks 18 to me?"
All you need to do is use a conversion scheme that isn't the same as those used by common radar detectors.
For instance, it might be common in the detector industry to use a first IF at 7 GHz. This could be convenient because the same 17 GHz LO would be useful for both 24 GHz K band and 10 GHz X band reception. I have no idea if that's what the manufacturers actually do, but if they do, then the "detector detectors" might work by listening for leakage at 17 GHz. Put your first LO in a different part of the microwave spectrum and they will have no way to detect it.
(Better still, vote for politicians who will implement reasonable speed limits and other traffic laws, rather than treating drivers as rolling cash machines.)
Yet if you ask the decision makers at Mozilla, they will probably tell you that most of the UI changes have been made using data from A/B tests, UI usage data (ie. UI hotspots). Is their methodology wrong?
Not at all, if your goal is to appeal to the lowest-common denominator of user. You'd better get it right, though, because at that point, you're playing Microsoft's game.
Yeah, and in real life there will always be some nutcases. It's human nature and its unavoidable. Knowing this, how do you defend a society handing guns to these nutcases?
Easy: with a history book. If you want to be safe, take the guns away from your police, government, and military first. Then take them away from the "nutcases."
The saddest thing about all of this is that it's something that Mozilla has done to itself! It wasn't Microsoft, or Google, or Apple, or Opera, or anyone else who destroyed Firefox. It was Mozilla, and Mozilla alone! Even Firefox's users can't be blamed, because they did what they could and protested each and every awful change that Mozilla has forced. It's all so goddamn unnecessary!
Good rant, and pretty much spot on target.
Apparently, they haven't even fixed issues as annoying as this, after almost five years. There are always plenty of resources at Mozilla to move controls around and break the UI, but when it comes to performance and real-world usability, well, that stuff isn't as much fun to work on, I guess.
(Hint: for those who are annoyed by FireFox's habit of hitching and pausing every 10 seconds or so, that liink to helgeklein.com is well worth a click. It seems to have fixed the problem for me.)
Remember, it's not genocide if it's the enemy. The progressives have been very clear about trying to destroy the roots and symbols of rural culture in America. Religion and Guns? Clearly must be suppressed.
I'm strongly opposed to gun control, but the arguments made by the other side are not without merit. A few gun owners have made their hobby/obsession a problem for the rest of us. Decent gun owners would be better served by reminding the rest of the population that they're not all a bunch of nutcases. Are you sure you're helping?
Same for the "religion" half of your argument. Keep your guns out of my face and your religion as well, and we'll get along juuuuust fine.
Deep family ties? Must financially punish marriage.
Yeah, for definitions of "financially punish" that include "Stop subsidizing specific peoples' personal relationships at everyone else's expense." I'm all for that.
Economy? The war on tobacco continues to destroy cash crops
Of course, tens of thousands of cases of heart disease and cancer don't have any economic consequences at all, am I right?
the war on coal decimating employment
I'm not a global-warrming alarmist but you don't have to be one to recognize that digging up coal and burning it is a stupid, inefficient, wasteful, and generally harmful way to generate power. The sooner we get away from coal the better off we'll all be, and that includes the rural areas.
and turning the education system into a proxy for the propaganda war has destroyed the education system there.
Yeah, when we took Jeebus out of the classroom and started teaching evolution, I guess that's when things really started to go to hell, huh?
This is exactly why sane people are starting to gang up against religion. Don't want a "propaganda war?" Don't start one.
Gravity is a wonderful example of the phenomenon at work here. Dark matter is an "inconvenient truth" in the astrophysics community, a fudge factor that keeps getting put into the equations, then taken out, then put back in again as newer and better observations are made.
Right now, the climate scientists have their own dark matter to deal with, which is the inconvenient refusal of the atmosphere and oceans to undergo consistent, predictable warming in defiance of our best numerical models. The answers to both conundrums will have one thing in common: neither of them will involve a "consensus of 99% of scientists" or any other sort of democratic process. Instead, they will emerge, unavoidably, from a hard-won understanding of the underlying physical mechanisms.... an understanding that we clearly don't have yet, in either astrophysics or climatology.
Soooo.... let's get the models right before we rewire our economy around them, okay?
Those coal miners ended up in that situation precisely because they could make 6-10x more money in the mines than they could on the farm or at the local lumber mill.
The money made it sound like a great gig... at first.
I'd have had them exploring a cave at the beginning of the novel. Watney's in the lead, and he falls into a crevasse. They're all roped together, but for some reason the rope failed to hold.
Watney is more or less uninjured, and only about 15 feet down. The rest of the astronauts could rescue him, but only if they go back to the ascent vehicle for the necessary climbing supplies. If they do that, they'll miss the launch window and will all be stranded.
Now that would be a hard scene to write, and even more disturbing to read, but it would kick things off with some interesting dark drama and interpersonal dynamics. Especially when Watney realizes that somebody cut his rope...
Slashdot Mirror
"Why you wanna hack?"
"Can't sleep nights."
Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy action.
By the twelfth or thirteenth time, it's reasonable to start blaming the victim.
Making thousands of legitimate customers suffer because of the mere possibility of an attack that obscure isn't "security," or even "security theatre." It's just plain malice.
That doesn't work. It's not always apparent what's important, or even who's important, until much later.
If they had fuzzed their text before encrypting it, it would have made all the difference in the world.
If they implement effective geoblocking, someone will just create an "Uber for foreign Netflix viewers" proxy. At that point it really will become impossible to enforce, because Netflix can't tell what's happening to the data after it reaches a US-based household.
I see it as more like the requirement for GMRS and (previously) CB licenses. You're supposed to have an FCC license before using GMRS, and the application form comes in the box with the walkie-talkie (or at least it used to.) But how many people ever fill out those forms and send them in?
Back when individual CB licenses were required, I'd be amazed if the compliance rate ever hit 1%.
Apparently, according to the longer document (which is an interesting way to kill an hour or two), there was also some kind of conferencing system between the individual launch control centers in each flight. The keys had to be turned at the local consoles, but at least one other control center also had to "vote" to launch, presumably by turning their keys as well.
Later, this was augmented by the addition of a box with some thumbwheel switches that required the entry of a specific code from SAC as a condition for launch.
Whine less, solder more.
Some guys named Oppenheimer, Fermi and Teller beg to differ.
I haven't found that to be true. In many other countries, often referred to as more "civilized" ones, people argue that the government should have a monopoly on the use of force.
And you know what? That's OK. We Americans will come over and bail you out of your next holocaust, attempted genocide, continent-wide war, or other large-scale human rights atrocity, the same way we've bailed you out of your previous ones. If history is any guide, you'll end up better off than you were before you started all the shit, and at our expense.
Rather than "debunking" anything, this quote reflects a situation that's even worse. If the model "appears to be" under 18, that's apparently enough to impose prior restraint. A standard based on bra size could at least be enforced objectively, but how do you appeal a decision of an unelected, unaccountable censorship board on no grounds other than "She looks 18 to me?"
Like the Australian state that just criminalized possession of CAD files?
Or the one that criminalizes video games?
Or the one that criminalizes porn actresses with A cups?
Australia is not the first country that comes to mind when "sane lawmaking" is the topic of discussion.
We're not the ones selling the tiger-repelling rocks.
All you need to do is use a conversion scheme that isn't the same as those used by common radar detectors.
For instance, it might be common in the detector industry to use a first IF at 7 GHz. This could be convenient because the same 17 GHz LO would be useful for both 24 GHz K band and 10 GHz X band reception. I have no idea if that's what the manufacturers actually do, but if they do, then the "detector detectors" might work by listening for leakage at 17 GHz. Put your first LO in a different part of the microwave spectrum and they will have no way to detect it.
(Better still, vote for politicians who will implement reasonable speed limits and other traffic laws, rather than treating drivers as rolling cash machines.)
Yet if you ask the decision makers at Mozilla, they will probably tell you that most of the UI changes have been made using data from A/B tests, UI usage data (ie. UI hotspots). Is their methodology wrong?
Not at all, if your goal is to appeal to the lowest-common denominator of user. You'd better get it right, though, because at that point, you're playing Microsoft's game.
Times changed, back then guns were an effective way to keep the government in check or seek independence, now not so much.
Really? Somebody should've told the Viet Cong, the Afghan rebels, and ISIS.
Yeah, and in real life there will always be some nutcases. It's human nature and its unavoidable. Knowing this, how do you defend a society handing guns to these nutcases?
Easy: with a history book. If you want to be safe, take the guns away from your police, government, and military first. Then take them away from the "nutcases."
The saddest thing about all of this is that it's something that Mozilla has done to itself! It wasn't Microsoft, or Google, or Apple, or Opera, or anyone else who destroyed Firefox. It was Mozilla, and Mozilla alone! Even Firefox's users can't be blamed, because they did what they could and protested each and every awful change that Mozilla has forced. It's all so goddamn unnecessary!
Good rant, and pretty much spot on target.
Apparently, they haven't even fixed issues as annoying as this, after almost five years. There are always plenty of resources at Mozilla to move controls around and break the UI, but when it comes to performance and real-world usability, well, that stuff isn't as much fun to work on, I guess.
(Hint: for those who are annoyed by FireFox's habit of hitching and pausing every 10 seconds or so, that liink to helgeklein.com is well worth a click. It seems to have fixed the problem for me.)
I think he's channeling Timothy Dexter. The foil is always shifting but the tin remains the same.
WTF, really?
Remember, it's not genocide if it's the enemy. The progressives have been very clear about trying to destroy the roots and symbols of rural culture in America. Religion and Guns? Clearly must be suppressed.
I'm strongly opposed to gun control, but the arguments made by the other side are not without merit. A few gun owners have made their hobby/obsession a problem for the rest of us. Decent gun owners would be better served by reminding the rest of the population that they're not all a bunch of nutcases. Are you sure you're helping?
Same for the "religion" half of your argument. Keep your guns out of my face and your religion as well, and we'll get along juuuuust fine.
Deep family ties? Must financially punish marriage.
Yeah, for definitions of "financially punish" that include "Stop subsidizing specific peoples' personal relationships at everyone else's expense." I'm all for that.
Economy? The war on tobacco continues to destroy cash crops
Of course, tens of thousands of cases of heart disease and cancer don't have any economic consequences at all, am I right?
the war on coal decimating employment
I'm not a global-warrming alarmist but you don't have to be one to recognize that digging up coal and burning it is a stupid, inefficient, wasteful, and generally harmful way to generate power. The sooner we get away from coal the better off we'll all be, and that includes the rural areas.
and turning the education system into a proxy for the propaganda war has destroyed the education system there.
Yeah, when we took Jeebus out of the classroom and started teaching evolution, I guess that's when things really started to go to hell, huh?
This is exactly why sane people are starting to gang up against religion. Don't want a "propaganda war?" Don't start one.
Gravity is a wonderful example of the phenomenon at work here. Dark matter is an "inconvenient truth" in the astrophysics community, a fudge factor that keeps getting put into the equations, then taken out, then put back in again as newer and better observations are made.
Right now, the climate scientists have their own dark matter to deal with, which is the inconvenient refusal of the atmosphere and oceans to undergo consistent, predictable warming in defiance of our best numerical models. The answers to both conundrums will have one thing in common: neither of them will involve a "consensus of 99% of scientists" or any other sort of democratic process. Instead, they will emerge, unavoidably, from a hard-won understanding of the underlying physical mechanisms.... an understanding that we clearly don't have yet, in either astrophysics or climatology.
Soooo.... let's get the models right before we rewire our economy around them, okay?
Really? Sounds like this judge had his/her verdict in mind before anyone stepped into the courtroom.
Those coal miners ended up in that situation precisely because they could make 6-10x more money in the mines than they could on the farm or at the local lumber mill.
The money made it sound like a great gig... at first.
I'd have had them exploring a cave at the beginning of the novel. Watney's in the lead, and he falls into a crevasse. They're all roped together, but for some reason the rope failed to hold.
Watney is more or less uninjured, and only about 15 feet down. The rest of the astronauts could rescue him, but only if they go back to the ascent vehicle for the necessary climbing supplies. If they do that, they'll miss the launch window and will all be stranded.
Now that would be a hard scene to write, and even more disturbing to read, but it would kick things off with some interesting dark drama and interpersonal dynamics. Especially when Watney realizes that somebody cut his rope...